Didn't he challenge Obama to not accept public funding or some such a while ago?

bulldg4life: Didn't he challenge Obama to not accept public funding or some such a while ago?

The way I understood it Obama and McCain both agreed to publicly funded campaigns if they win their parties nominations, and then they both begin to backpedal on it. If McCain goes with public funding and Obama stays with donations it will be a vastly underfunded McCain against Obama's gazillions, but McCain will have the moral high ground for sticking to his promise and Obama will get blasted for backing out of his. Of course that will depend on whether the media would even notice.

bulldg4life: Didn't he challenge Obama to not accept public funding or some such a while ago?

After hauling in nearly $95 million in two months, Obama takes a break from recording commercials to agree to this challenge.

I believe the term is "hoisted on his own petard"

Hasn't he already spent more than his limit?

Oh, and I liked this:

The move is largely procedural, and McCain's campaign said yesterday that it has not yet decided whether to accept public funding or to raise money on its own for the November presidential election.

I know every time I write $3million in checks, it is 'largely procedural'.

cameroncrazy1984: I believe the term is "hoisted on his own petard"

Or maybe even "Campwn3d"?

bulldg4life: Didn't he challenge Obama to not accept public funding or some such a while ago?

That's like me challenging Michael Jordan to a one-legged dunking contest.

Can we focus on the bigger issues here, people? Obama's preacher said something that I disagree with!

Jubeebee: bulldg4life: Didn't he challenge Obama to not accept public funding or some such a while ago?

After hauling in nearly $95 million in two months, Obama takes a break from recording commercials to agree to this challenge.

Since he wouldn't be the official nominee until September, couldn't he raise money and spend it until then, then just blow out the 84 million over the last two months?

sepuku2: and then they both begin to backpedal...

I love how they both backpedal, but you speculate on a scenario where Obama breaks the promise and McCain doesn't, in a thread about how McCain has already violated the finance law he helped write.

sepuku2: The way I understood it Obama and McCain both agreed to publicly funded campaigns if they win their parties nominations, and then they both begin to backpedal on it.

I couldn't find this story anywhere-- got a link?

Obdicut: sepuku2: The way I understood it Obama and McCain both agreed to publicly funded campaigns if they win their parties nominations, and then they both begin to backpedal on it.

I couldn't find this story anywhere-- got a link?

IIRC, Obama said he'd get together with McCain and come up with a solution if they were both the nominees. I don't think he ever definitively said.

I'll dig around. I think I heard Juan Williams talking about it on George Stephenopoulos or one of the other Sunday Morning talk shows.

Obdicut: I couldn't find this story anywhere-- got a link?

I found it.

Here you go. (pops)

Obdicut: sepuku2: The way I understood it Obama and McCain both agreed to publicly funded campaigns if they win their parties nominations, and then they both begin to backpedal on it.

I couldn't find this story anywhere-- got a link?


Obama's original agreement to use public campaign funds was brought up by Tim Russert in one of the Obama/Clinton debates. Obama didn't deny it (and, frankly, dodged the question with doublespeak), so it's safe to assume it as true. It looks like Obama might get caught between a rock and a hard place on this one.

Rock: Obama originally declared he would use public funds for the General Election. Backpedaling on this would be an easy attack point for his opposition.

Hard Place: Obama's fund-raising has gone far, far better than anyone's wildest dreams, and he would be an idiot to hamstring himself at this point. Having a massive fundraising advantage would only help propel him to the White House.

Point to Consider: Public financing is supposed to help stave off excessive donations from PACs and lobbyists, and the quid pro quo expectation that comes with them. By having the money come from public coffers, theoretically there should be no sense of quid pro quo attached to it other than to the taxpayers as a whole. Obama's private financing, however, has been almost entirely bereft of PAC and lobbyist money anyway.

I tend to think that Obama will go with continued private financing, and bring up that point of consideration when he is attacked on backpedaling.

BKITU: Obama's original agreement to use public campaign funds was brought up by Tim Russert in one of the Obama/Clinton debates. Obama didn't deny it (and, frankly, dodged the question with doublespeak), so it's safe to assume it as true. It looks like Obama might get caught between a rock and a hard place on this one.


Well, it looks like, from the quotes sepuku2 has provided, that Obama pledged to work with the Republican nominee to use public funds. However, since that nominee is McCain, and since McCain may have already violated the spending law, there's a little more to this.

I'd guess that if Obama was willing to go back to public funds now-- something that he made sure he could do-- he'd require McCain publicly admitting that he'd violated the system, first.

The Why Not Guy: I love how they both backpedal, but you speculate on a scenario where Obama breaks the promise and McCain doesn't, in a thread about how McCain has already violated the finance law he helped write.

That's because I was answering the question about public funding from bulldg4life.

The way I understood it...McCain said that both nominees should use public funds. But, he already went past the limit...so he'd be screwed for several months. So, he either goes back on his promise to use public funds or he violates the system.

only because he got caught

As long as McCain said "My friends...." when he returned it, that's all that matters to me.

the real reason is the GOP isn't donating like the dems are. McCain can make more accepting the public money than he can raising it.
If he were raising it like Obama was this wouldn't even be an item.

You know who else didn't follow the laws he wrote... (new window)

John McCain spoke about this at a press conference today.
Here (new window)

Huh? I'm trying to understand submitter's bitterness on what seems to be the most benign story ever.

McCain has private contributions. This is not illegal. If he wants public funding, then the private contributions would only be illegal if he didn't return it. But he is returning it, so it's a non-issue. Am I missing something here? Or should I just be bitter because this is Fark's political section?

This is what wiki (new window) says on the subject:

For qualified candidates, the government provides a dollar for dollar "match" from the government for each contribution to the campaign, up to a limit of $250 per contribution. In return, the candidate agrees to limit his or her spending according to a statutory formula.

From the inception of this program in 1976 through 1992, almost all candidates who could qualify accepted matching funds in the primary. However, in 1996 Republican Steve Forbes opted out of the program. In 2000, Forbes and George W. Bush opted out. In 2004 Bush and Democrats John Kerry and Howard Dean chose not to take matching funds in the primary.

In 2008, Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, and Republicans John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul have decided not to take matching funds. Democrat John Edwards[4] qualified for and elected to take public funds in the primary. Republican Tom Tancredo[5] and Democrats Chris Dodd[6] and Joe Biden[7] also elected to take public financing, but have since dropped from the election.

Like most things the government does that I don't understand, it sounds screwy.

Holy crap. Didn't anyone - much less subby - actually read the article?

The returned contributions aren't illegal at all. He's returning them so he doesn't have too much money to qualify for public financing.

AFAIC, it would be good if McCain using the public financing system. I've advocated it as a way to reduce corruption in politics for years. When Bush was out-raising the Democrats by zillions of dollars, all the Democrats were screaming out for public financing of elections, to "even the playing field" and "get corruption out of politics."

But now that Obama is raising lots of money, that chorus has fallen silent. You could hear a pin drop.

Interesting.

RumsfeldsReplacement

You shut your lying whore mouth! Never once did he give me up, let me down, run around or hurt me!

helix400: If he wants public funding, then the private contributions would only be illegal if he didn't return it. But he is returning it, so it's a non-issue.

He already committed to public financing by using what amounts to the line of credit he had with public financing back when he wasn't getting any private financing to finance a loan to keep his campaign afloat.

/finance.

submitter: John McCain returns $3 million in illegal campaign donations after realizing yeah, maybe he should obey the federal law that HE WROTE

The word "illegal" appears absolutely zero times in the article. Great jorb, subby.

canyoneer: But now that Obama is raising lots of money, that chorus has fallen silent. You could hear a pin drop.

The point of public financing is to theoretically eliminate the power of corporations in the financing of our elections.

Since Obama has apparently found a way to get funded by everyday Joes instead of the Enrons of the world, it is kind of a moot point.

Or is that why you thought it was interesting?

Wow, McCain isn't even waiting to be sworn in before he continues Bush's time honored Bad News Friday tradition.

\sign of whats to come

Skleenar: helix400: If he wants public funding, then the private contributions would only be illegal if he didn't return it. But he is returning it, so it's a non-issue.

He already committed to public financing by using what amounts to the line of credit he had with public financing back when he wasn't getting any private financing to finance a loan to keep his campaign afloat.

/finance.

Aaah, thanks for the reminder. I didn't follow the Democrats/Dean/FEC/McCain/public funding mess earlier too well. It sounds like submitter is referring to that.

Best info I found in a quick Google search was this (link):

"The question was whether he could back out now. A couple of lawyers quoted in the Politico basically said he couldn't, unless the Federal Election Commission ruled otherwise, and the FEC can't make any rulings now, because they don't have enough commissioners to make a quorum. I pointed out that this would not only cause problems for McCain in the remainder of his campaign for the GOP nomination, but cripple him in the general election, as he would have no funds to campaign until the convention in September.

This led to a lengthy discussion among people who actually know what they're talking about -- former FEC commissioners and top election lawyers and law professors -- on a listserv. Eventually former FEC chair Michael Toner pointed to an advisory opinion issued to Rep. Dick Gephardt in 2003, which said that, since the public financing system was voluntary, he could change his mind until receiving the money. One key condition in that case was that Gephardt had not used the promise of public money as collateral for a loan. McCain seems to have followed this to the letter: McCain did take a large loan, and although one press account said he had borrowed against the matching funds, in fact the required disclosure of the loan is online and the section on collateral reads, "All Assets of Any Kind or Amount excluding certifications for federal matching funds." Instead, according to the Washington Post, he pledged future contributions, the future value of his mailing lists, and a large life insurance policy. So it appears McCain has navigated the letter of the law carefully. "

They are all crooks and I'm not surprised by any of these shenanigans.

Skleenar

Well, I don't know where Obama is getting his money. Maybe it all comes from "everyday Joes" as you say.

I still support the idea of public campaign financing. It is really bad when giant corporations finance elections. I can imagine a situation in which it would really bad if "everyday Joes" financed elections, too.

"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

- Thomas Jefferson

I certainly can't see why any of McCain's opponents could credibly criticize him for using public financing. Subby is full of sh*t, too. Headlines should be clever, not outright lies.

helix400: Best info I found in a quick Google search was this (link):

A blog post at the American Prospect?

Yeah. I am sure that will stand up in a court of law.

Actually, I was going to flame you on the above, but the post did link to original sources. His review is correct that the application does exclude those Federal funds. But what you are glossing over, and what the WaPo reports, is that claiming he would apply for federal funds then allowed him to claim to the bank he could garner enough private donations to cover that borrowed amount. That ensured that he could continue his campaign longer than would have been reasonable without the federal funds, and thus more private donations could be gained.

canyoneer: I certainly can't see why any of McCain's opponents could credibly criticize him for using public financing.

No one is criticizing him for that.

They are criticizing him for trying to have it both ways.

And you know that.

canyoneer: I certainly can't see why any of McCain's opponents could credibly criticize him for using public financing. Subby is full of sh*t, too. Headlines should be clever, not outright lies.

See the post below yours.

The donations were not illegal. However, if McCain were to go with public financing, these specific donations would then be illegal to use.

/subby does not comprehend

canyoneer: Skleenar

Well, I don't know where Obama is getting his money. Maybe it all comes from "everyday Joes" as you say.

I still support the idea of public campaign financing. It is really bad when giant corporations finance elections. I can imagine a situation in which it would really bad if "everyday Joes" financed elections, too.

"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

- Thomas Jefferson

I certainly can't see why any of McCain's opponents could credibly criticize him for using public financing. Subby is full of sh*t, too. Headlines should be clever, not outright lies.

I'm gonna oversimplify as I don't know all the details,

But only individuals who are citizens can donate up to 2300 dollars. Corporations and Unions are not allowed to donate shiat as far as I know. But then there is the whole issue of those ads that get run on behalf of the candidates that complicates things.

I understand very little of it. But considering we now have the internet and credit cards, laws from the 70s don't make much sense.

I think there will be some reform of the system in the near future, as no one seems to know how the hell shiat works anymore.

It's not really partisan, although it's fun to put every thing and every event in history into the woefully inadequate left/right dichotomy of popular psychology that is United States politics.

Oh, and Jefferson was right. I'm glad we decided on a Republic too. Democracies are scary.

Skleenar

I don't think he's trying to have it both ways. He's hedging his bets. As you know, he hasn't attracted a lot of support - yet. Why should he foreswear public financing if it means he'll be outspent 10-1 in the general? Besides, he just returned $3 million in contributions, which doesn't sound like "trying to have it both ways" to me. He returned the monies.

I'm still a big fan of public campaign financing. I think all the candidates should agree to that and just go with it.

canyoneer: I don't think he's trying to have it both ways. He's hedging his bets.

I'll take distinctions without a difference for $100, Alex.

Besides, he just returned $3 million in contributions, which doesn't sound like "trying to have it both ways" to me. He returned the monies.

After they already allowed him to continue his campaign.

That's like giving back the bandage after your finger heals.

McCain is a douche, but do you think that he's pouring over the thousands of checks to make sure they're all legit? There wouldn't be any time for him to take a crap let alone campaign.

Well, it's a small victory on the side of law and order. That's better than nothing.

Skleenar:

Thanks for the extra info. I'll be honest, it's a complex case that I'm still mostly in the dark about. Normally I jump into these things more, but meh, it's a nice spring day here. I'm going outside for a change. :) So as Samuel Goldwyn said "Gentlemen, include me out"

DarnoKonrad: Oh, and Jefferson was right. I'm glad we decided on a Republic too. Democracies are scary.



Frowns upon your shenanigans.

canyoneer: Skleenar

Well, I don't know where Obama is getting his money. Maybe it all comes from "everyday Joes" as you say.



Here you go
Link (new window)

Skleenar: No one is criticizing him for that.

They are criticizing him for trying to have it both ways.

And you know that.

Whats worse is he has spent years and years talking about special interests having too much control on the election system but then he throws it all out the window when things get hard.

What did he do when his campaign ran out of money?

He had lobbyists take over his staff and work for "free".

He has the most lobbyists of all the candidates on his staff and they work at ever key position of his campaign.

It shows you what kind of politician he is. When things get hard he throws out his beliefs out the window. The ends justifies the means.

canyoneer: He returned the monies.

...After he realized that both Obama and Clinton would be able to raise tons more than him even if he didn't try to take public funds.

It would of been one thing if he promised to do this all the way. But he didn't!

canyoneer: Well, I don't know where Obama is getting his money. Maybe it all comes from "everyday Joes" as you say.

A grand total of $250 from PACs according to opensecrets.org^. All the rest from individual donors.

canyoneer: Well, I don't know where Obama is getting his money. Maybe it all comes from "everyday Joes" as you say.

Well it's been reported most places:

He brought in $28 million online, with 90 percent of those transactions coming from people who donated $100 or less, and 40 percent from donors who gave $25 or less,

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/us/politics/20obama.html

He is running the campaign that McCain says people should run while McCain is running the campaign that McCain in the past has characterized as the corrupting influence of our system.