Prepare for flood of money

Opinion: May 13, 2010 at 12:00a.m.

By Bob Edgar

McClatchy-Tribune

In a recent radio address, President Obama put his finger on the most powerful weapon available to special interests today — fear.

“In the starkest terms, members will know — when pressured by lobbyists — that if they dare to oppose that lobbyist’s client, they could face an onslaught of negative advertisements in the runup to their next election,” he said.

Obama was right. The 5-to-4 ruling by the Supreme Court that lifted the ban on corporate and union spending on elections has turned a longstanding problem into a crisis. Big business is primed and eager to unleash an epic flood of money this November through independent expenditures, allowing CEOs to reward their friends and punish their enemies in Congress.

Is more disclosure the answer? It is, according to Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Chris Van Hollen, who just introduced the ambitious DISCLOSE Act to create a new regime of transparency for independent expenditures.

The intent is noble, but the threatening power of money over timid politicians won’t be checked by disclosure alone. Corporate execs with political agendas aren’t listening to Obama on this one; they are listening to Theodore Roosevelt — “Speak softly and carry a big stick.”

Indeed, from now on they may hardly need to speak at all. Whatever level of disclosure we establish, the real question is whether corporations will have to spend a penny to get their message across.

Defense lobbyist

When I represented the 7th District of Pennsylvania in Congress from 1975 to 1987, I saw this firsthand. One day I got a visit from a defense lobbyist from Boeing Rotorcraft Systems. The lobbyist reminded me how appreciative they were of my support for their manufacturing plant in my district, and how they hoped to keep supporting me, if they could.

They really, really (I mean really) didn’t want to support my opponent, they said. But they stressed how important my vote was to authorize new helicopters to sell to Argentina, despite the trade embargo against this oppressive government. Their message was clear, and the lobbyist left cordially. Of course, when I voted against the sale of the helicopters and supported the embargo, my opponent found his campaign war chest significantly richer.

The fear factor might sound like business as usual in Washington, but it’s worse today. After Citizens United, the thump of the corporate checkbook on a congressional desk will be much louder than when I served in Congress. We have yet to see how this election season will play out under new rules, but already dozens of vulnerable incumbents have been worrying about crossing the powerful special interests over health care, Wall Street reform, climate change and more.

The premise of the Schumer-Van Hollen bill is that the public will hold corporations accountable for outlandish political spending. But no amount of disclosure will cure the behind-the-scenes “persuasion” attempted by fat-cat donors who show up in a lawmaker’s office tapping their wallets, and it does nothing to end candidate dependence on campaign cash.

Fundamental reform is needed, and we ought to look to public funding of campaigns. As they take up corporate disclosure, leaders in both chambers should consider the Fair Elections Now Act, a voluntary system that would allow candidates to run competitive campaigns on a blend of unlimited small donations and limited public funds.

Bob Edgar is president and CEO of Common Cause (www.commoncause.org), a nonpartisan government watchdog organization and a former member of Congress from Pennsylvania. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.