Another serious flaw in Campaign Finance Rules

Haven't we seen this before? In 2004, Soros couldn't give money directly to Howard Dean, so he gave the money to MoveOn.org and let them raise money for Dean. Soros again can't give the money directly to Hillary, so he is giving the money to someone this time who will raise money for Hillary and others. Wasn't Soros the big funder of the new campaign finance laws? How can anyone defend these rules?

A group of well-connected Democrats led by a former top aide to Bill Clinton is raising millions of dollars to start a private firm that plans to compile huge amounts of data on Americans to identify Democratic voters and blunt what has been a clear Republican lead in using technology for political advantage.

The effort by Harold Ickes, a deputy chief of staff in the Clinton White House and an adviser to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), is prompting intense behind-the-scenes debate in Democratic circles. Officials at the Democratic National Committee think that creating a modern database is their job, and they say that a competing for-profit entity could divert energy and money that should instead be invested with the national party.

Ickes and others involved in the effort acknowledge that their activities are in part a vote of no confidence that the DNC under Chairman Howard Dean is ready to compete with Republicans on the technological front. "The Republicans have developed a cadre of people who appreciate databases and know how to use them, and we are way behind the march," said Ickes, whose political technology venture is being backed by financier George Soros.

"It's unclear what the DNC is doing. Is it going to be kept up to date?" Ickes asked, adding that out-of-date voter information is "worse than having no database at all." . . .


Anonymous Kristopher said...

Has anyone even considered not infringing on the first amendment?

McCain-Feingold is an insult to the BoR.

3/08/2006 12:45 PM  
Blogger fatinspanish said...

kind of like how your boss Scaife operates, no?

3/08/2006 4:15 PM  
Blogger John Lott said...

Neither on topic nor is it even clear what you are saying. I also don't receive any money from Scaife. However, if you are arguing that money can be funneled in many different ways (e.g., Soros could buy a newspaper), that is exactly my point and why these campaign finance laws are so problematic.

3/08/2006 4:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's very obvious that this was part of the plan of campaign "reform".

Soros was just too ready to exploit the loophole.

Now... the real question is how many and which of the "reformers" knew about this beforehand.

3/11/2006 2:45 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home