The Plumline: Unions, Liberal Groups Urge Dem Leaders to Think Big in Campaign Finance Fight

[flpoljunkie]

Yeah! (Emphasis mine.)

Dear Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid: If you’re going to go to war with corporations over that Supreme Court decision, do it right.

That’s the message in a letter that a powerful coalition of liberal groups and unions have fired off to Pelosi and Reid, urging them to seize on the SCOTUS decision allowing corporate money to fund elections to deal a death blow to the influence of big money in politics — by approving public financing of campaigns.

With the President using his bully pulpit to rally the public against the SCOTUS ruling, the groups — which include SEIU, MoveOn, People for the American Way and many others — think the court’s decision actually presents them with an opportunity.

The letter they’ve sent to Reid and Pelosi, to be released this afternoon, urges them to adopt a measure called the Fair Elections Now Act, which has 129 co-sponsors in the House and would enact public financing of federal elections. Campaign finance reform types say the act would give candidates the option to run for office on a mixture of small contributions and limited public funds — strengthening campaigns funded by grassroots fundraising and undercutting the power of large corporate donors.

You should seize the opportunity provided by the Citizens United decision to advance solutions to address the comprehensive problem of money in politics. Only policies like Fair Elections will reduce voter concerns about the influence of campaign donors, just as Congress did with post-Watergate reforms a generation ago. The path forward lies with small-donor democracy, not increased corporate dominance in Washington.

In closing, we encourage you to use your leadership role to push forward the Fair Elections Now Act as the part of the solution to address the potential problems created in the wake of the Citizens United decision. The time is now to strengthen voter participation in our democracy through a small-donor based public funding system.

The kicker: The companion version of this legislation in the Senate was co-sponsored by a former Senator named Barack Obama.

It’s unclear what course of action Obama will take in going to war against the SCOTUS decision. But this measure has bipartisan support, and Obama’s own rise to power was fueled by precisely the types of donations this bill is designed to enhance. So these groups are hoping that if Obama wants to make this one of the defining crusades of his presidency, he’ll be persuaded to get it right.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/labor/unions-liberal-groups-urge-dem-leaders-to-think-big-in-campaign-finance-fight/

[Imajika]

1. Err, wait...

..wasn't Obama the first presidential nominee to reject the existing public financing of his presidential campaign?

I mean, won't this come off a bit hypocritical?

He was for the current version of public financing until it looked like he could rake in more by dropping out? Going to be difficult to lead the charge on this considering how he handled his 2008 campaign.

[DrToast]

2. Not really. What he did was completely compatible with the Fair Elections Now Act

Nobody would be prohibited from collecting individual donations, which is all he did.

[senseandsensibility]

3. Let's get this on the greatest page

people!