Towards New Reform Groups

by: Matt Stoller

Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 16:51


In my last post on Common Cause, I didn't bring up the newer better groups that have emerged to make corruption and good government voting issues.  CREW and Public Campaign, while both are explicitly nonpartisan and do not do work on behalf of candidates, are extremely aggressive about putting the question of good government and corruption to voters.  Public Campaign, for instance, has worked on McCain's flouting of FEC law, and the group did push for the FEC to step in on petty cash.  CREW is unafraid to go after Republicans, and though corruption is nonpartisan, takes the fight to where it tends to be.

Ultimately these groups are pushing for nonpartisan solutions, public financing of elections and stronger ethics enforcement in Congress, but they are asking the voters to make that choice.  And that's the right way to deal with corruption in a democracy.

UPDATE:  And here's the awesome group Public Citizen:

Public Citizen, the government watchdog group, is offering itself as a character witness for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in his defense against recent reports questioning his close ties to lobbyists.

"Regardless of how many lobbyists are working on his campaign or raising money for him, John McCain has fought for 14 long, hard years for reforms that seriously limit lobbyists' power," Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, said in a statement....

Claybrook said McCain has a record of standing up to powerful interests in Washington. "He has fought for campaign finance reform, limits on gifts and travel from lobbyists, and extensive public disclosure of lobbyists' activities - all of which limit the influence of lobbyists and the companies that hire lobbyists in Washington, D.C.," she said.

People at Public Citizen hate the branding associated with their founder, Ralph Nader.  But I suppose it's just in their DNA.

Matt Stoller :: Towards New Reform Groups

Tags: , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Wow. (4.00 / 3)
Thanks for putting up that Public Citizen quote. I kind of thought they were OKish after watching the Nader documentary on PBS (An Unreasonable Man) when Claybrook tried to put a little distance between herself and Ralph. Today I don't give a shit whether they're close to Ralph or not, but I do care that they would openly ally with McCain. They won't see another penny from my wallet!  

"I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that."
-Lawrence Summers


If you've donated to them in the past (4.00 / 1)
By all means, send them a letter next time they ask you for money explaining why you won't be donating anymore.

You know what they say, 'money speaks louder than words'. Something like that, anyway.

I support John McCain because children are too healthy anyway.


[ Parent ]
As a former (0.00 / 0)
student of the late Archibald Cox (who was President of Common Cause) it pains me to read this about the organization he led.

I will say that my good friend, who works for a group dedicated to enacting public funding for campaigns, has said some good things about Leach.  


Cox (0.00 / 0)
Archibald Cox put ethics, integrity, thoughtfulness and independence ahead of partisanship.  Not unlike Jim Leach.  

Let's also keep this in mind about Public Campaign: they operate a 527 that doesn't have to play by the same rules of nonpartisanship that Common Cause and other similar groups do.


[ Parent ]
Really? (0.00 / 0)
Whether or not Leach deserves to be on the board, was a good congressman, etc., casting a vote for Tom Delay as majority leader shows, quite obviously, that he was putting partisanship ahead of "integrity, thoughtfulness and independence", not the other way around.

I support John McCain because children are too healthy anyway.

[ Parent ]
Public Campaign Action Fund's 527 (4.00 / 1)
Hi, patt75 -- I work for Public Campaign Action Fund, and I just wanted to point out that what you wrote is not true. Public Campaign Action Fund, our 501c4 organization, operates a section 527 committee called Campaign Money Watch. Common Cause, as a 501c4, could DECIDE to deliver the same types of messages Campaign Money Watch does as long as that doesn't become their primary purpose.

Common Cause and Public Campaign Action Fund work together on state and federal public financing efforts, but there are things each organization decides to do to further its own mission as each sees fit. For Common Cause, it may be signing up a prominent former member of Congress as a chairman. For Public Campaign Action Fund, it may be deciding to try to hold corrupt anti-reform politicians accountable, like Tom DeLay, Ralph Reed, and Bill Jefferson. Both courses are decisions.

It's simply not true that PCAF's 527 "doesn't have to play by the same rules" that Common Cause does. It's a choice. We operate the 527 to provide more transparency (527s disclose, c4s do not) and because we think it's the appropriate legal structure for us. And just because we engage voters in the middle of elections doesn't mean we take a back seat to anyone in our nonpartisan commitment to passing public financing.


[ Parent ]
petty cash... (0.00 / 0)
You mentioned Public Campaign worked on the FEC and petty cash.

Did anything ever come of Lieberman's really large amount of petty cash in his 2006 primary disclosure forms?

They call me Clem, Clem Guttata. Come visit wild, wonderful West Virginia Blue


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox