Editorial: McConnell shows he's a bully boy

A key Republican Senate leader has sent a letter to executives suggesting they renounce their supportfor campaign finance reform. What's this all about?

Sen. Mitch McConnell claims free speech would be jeopardized by campaign finance reform, but his broadside suggesting businesses recant their support for this bill is hypocritical.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has proven to be one of the key stumbling blocks to passage of campaign finance reform that would ban soft money, the unregulated contributions that corporations, labor unions and the wealthy make to political parties. Last year McConnell used parliamentary maneuvers to thwart campaign finance reform legislation that passed overwhelmingly in the House and had majority support in the Senate.

There is a glimmer of hope for the measure this year, though, because bipartisan supporters of campaign finance reform were able to get assurances from the GOP leadership in both houses that they would agree to hold votes on the bill this fall. But McConnell has been working overtime to scuttle the legislation by sending threatening letters to members of the Committee for Economic Development, a group of business leaders who support this reform.

McConnell, who also is chairman of the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee that raises money for GOP candidates, sent a July 28 letter to trustees of the Committee for Economic Development, saying the group's efforts "would ban corporate political activism and render the Republican Party powerless to defend pro-business candidates from negative TV attacks by labor unions, trial lawyers and radical environmentalists." He concludes the letter with this ominous message: "If you disagree with the radical campaign finance agenda of the Committee for Economic Development and resent its abuse of your company's reputation, I would think that public withdrawal from this organization would be a reasonable response."

Hidden between the lines of McConnell's broadside is that many of those executives have legislation pending in Congress and, therefore, they should withdraw their support. The irony of McConnell's "suggestion" that these executives renounce their views is that he has wrapped himself in the First Amendment in his opposition to any limits on campaign contributions, which McConnell equates with free speech.

The "radical" members of the Committee for Economic Development include executives from Xerox, General Motors, Sara Lee and other respected companies. The reason McConnell is so worried about business executives supporting reform is that it makes it difficult for opponents to portray the other side as just a group of do-gooders bent on limiting the influence of businesses in politics. Often the debate is pictured solely as an attempt to rein in the influence of special interest groups, such as corporations and unions. But another reality is that businesses also believe they're being shaken down by members of Congress to make contributions. Failure to make donations, the thinking goes, could result in adverse legislation affecting their business or industry.

Fortunately none of the business executives have said they will back down in light of McConnell's missive. It is hoped that members of Congress, too, will show similar resolve and pass these reasonable reforms to curtail the growing influence money plays in politics.

archive