Wednesday, May 02, 2007
OUT-REFORMING ELIOT
New York Post Editorial
This post editorial is pure republican bs........they don't want campaign contribution limits.....yet they support this phony republican revenge bill......fundraising is a political reality......nobody likes to do it........but you need money to run.....this is another excuse for the Republicans to avoid real campaign reform.................where was the post's indignation when pataki was governor??? andy
May 2, 2007 -- Assembly GOP leader James Tedisco has fired a shot across the campaign-finance bow at Gov. Spitzer, announcing he'll introduce a bill to limit the practice of "bundling" - campaign cash put together by individual fund-raisers.
You know the concept - it's the one Spitzer himself is using in his own re-election bid in 2010, promising bundlers who raise $25,000 to $1 million a rolling scale of special inside-access inducements.
Which is why Tedisco's bill is certainly far more in line with the governor's campaign promise to fix the way business is done in Albany than is Spitzer himself.
After all, as Spitzer noted the other day, "Special interests give millions to lawmakers each year and, in return, lawmakers are expected to do their bidding."
Precisely.
And nowhere is this attitude more blatant than in the practice of bundling.
It allows lobbyists, power-brokers and influence-peddlers to enhance their power by delivering a pile of checks far above the individual campaign limits to appreciative lawmakers.
Tedisco proposes to limit bundling in state races to a maximum of $100,000 per individual. "If anything defines pay-to-play, this is it," he says.
In fact, his bill would go even further: It would require campaigns to publicly disclose those who bundle for them and how much they raise; list the name, occupation, employer and spouse's employer of all contributors and list any specific access awarded by contribution level.
The governor had no immediate comment yesterday. He was off in California - on a political fund-raising trip.
But state Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, who would dearly love to stick one to the governor, said he's open to placing limits on bundling.
As are we.
We've been leery of past efforts at campaign-finance reform - most of which have amounted to little more than an attack on the First Amendment rights of individuals and groups to support the candidate of their choice.
But no such limits are proposed here.
All that's at stake is the ability of would-be political players to boost their clout by playing campaign Santa Claus, delivering bundles of cash and checks to money-hungry legislators.
We hope that Spitzer agrees - when he returns with his California cash.
This post editorial is pure republican bs........they don't want campaign contribution limits.....yet they support this phony republican revenge bill......fundraising is a political reality......nobody likes to do it........but you need money to run.....this is another excuse for the Republicans to avoid real campaign reform.................where was the post's indignation when pataki was governor??? andy
May 2, 2007 -- Assembly GOP leader James Tedisco has fired a shot across the campaign-finance bow at Gov. Spitzer, announcing he'll introduce a bill to limit the practice of "bundling" - campaign cash put together by individual fund-raisers.
You know the concept - it's the one Spitzer himself is using in his own re-election bid in 2010, promising bundlers who raise $25,000 to $1 million a rolling scale of special inside-access inducements.
Which is why Tedisco's bill is certainly far more in line with the governor's campaign promise to fix the way business is done in Albany than is Spitzer himself.
After all, as Spitzer noted the other day, "Special interests give millions to lawmakers each year and, in return, lawmakers are expected to do their bidding."
Precisely.
And nowhere is this attitude more blatant than in the practice of bundling.
It allows lobbyists, power-brokers and influence-peddlers to enhance their power by delivering a pile of checks far above the individual campaign limits to appreciative lawmakers.
Tedisco proposes to limit bundling in state races to a maximum of $100,000 per individual. "If anything defines pay-to-play, this is it," he says.
In fact, his bill would go even further: It would require campaigns to publicly disclose those who bundle for them and how much they raise; list the name, occupation, employer and spouse's employer of all contributors and list any specific access awarded by contribution level.
The governor had no immediate comment yesterday. He was off in California - on a political fund-raising trip.
But state Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, who would dearly love to stick one to the governor, said he's open to placing limits on bundling.
As are we.
We've been leery of past efforts at campaign-finance reform - most of which have amounted to little more than an attack on the First Amendment rights of individuals and groups to support the candidate of their choice.
But no such limits are proposed here.
All that's at stake is the ability of would-be political players to boost their clout by playing campaign Santa Claus, delivering bundles of cash and checks to money-hungry legislators.
We hope that Spitzer agrees - when he returns with his California cash.
