Candidates must denounce the soft-money lies

  • David Broder
  • Saturday, August 28, 2004 9:00pm
  • Opinion

GREEN BAY, Wis. – When John Kerry came to the Packers’ home town for a campaign appearance last week, no one was happier to see him than the owners of the local television stations. Kerry has been very good to them, and so has President Bush, as both sides advertise heavily here, seeking an edge in the struggle for this battleground state.

Spending by the two sides put Green Bay in 12th place among all media markets in the country. Wisconsin is also one of the three states where the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth launched their now-famous campaign to discredit Kerry’s Vietnam service record. And it is a major target for ads sponsored by the Media Fund, America Coming Together and other independent organizations out to defeat Bush.

With total reported political contributions for this cycle already past the $1 billion mark – and the heaviest ad buys still to come – the character of the perpetual debate about campaign financing has begun to shift. Instead of focusing on who is giving how much, the argument now seems to be about who has the right to join in the spending spree.

Bush’s stated position is that the non-party groups such as the Swift Boaters and America Coming Together ought to butt out of the campaign debate and let the two parties and their nominees decide what messages the voters hear. He has challenged Kerry to renounce all such ads – and the Democrat has declined the invitation.

There is an element of self-interest in Bush’s position. His campaign and the Republican Party have substantially outraised Kerry and the Democrats in “hard money” contributions, those whose size is controlled by law. The latest scorecard reads GOP $485 million; Democrats $379 million. But independent groups supporting Kerry got a much earlier start and have collected much more “soft money,” which is unlimited, than those on Bush’s side. The pro-Kerry groups have $145 million; the pro-Bush, $9 million.

With record sums available to both sides – either through their official committees or through the independent groups supporting them – the real issue is not one of finance but of accountability.

What the candidates and the political parties put on the air become their responsibility. Cheap shots and blatant distortions can be – and have been – laid right at their doorstep. But when independent groups launch their broadsides at the opposition candidate, the intended beneficiary can – and often does – wash his hands of the whole affair.

That is what Bush has done with the Swift Boaters; rather than denounce their allegations that Kerry lied about his war wounds and decorations, he has righteously come down against all such non-official ads. The White House announced Thursday that Bush would join Sen. John McCain in a lawsuit “to shut down all the ads and activity” by these groups.

Implicit in Bush’s stance is the assumption that the election-period dialogue is the exclusive property of the parties and their candidates. But that is not – and never has been – the law, and it hardly fits the realities of America’s pluralistic society.

The institutions and individuals with a stake in the presidential election are far more numerous than two parties and two candidates. All sorts of other groups – from left and right, from environmentalists to anti-abortionists – have much riding on the outcome. By what logic are they to be prohibited from running their ads?

Kerry had no difficulty proving that some of the people involved in the independent pro-Bush groups were veteran Republicans with close ties to the Bush family or campaign. The same sort of incestuous relationship is even more obvious among the pro-Kerry independents, whose leaders include Kerry’s own former campaign manager and two former Clinton White House political directors.

Almost simultaneous with Bush’s denunciation of these groups came word that new organizations aimed at defeating Kerry had been formed by people who served as chiefs of staff to the president’s father and fellow members of the Reagan-Bush administration. Those groups announced financial plans that will soon put them in the same league as the pro-Kerry independents.

The reality is that, in a nation with our Constitution’s guarantee of free speech and a government whose decisions impact on every aspect of life, the flow of money from the private sector into the political world will be almost impossible to control.

What can be disciplined is the tendency of these ads to exaggerate, distort or flat-out lie. And the candidates who benefit from the ads are the ones who have the first responsibility – along with the press – to police them. The candidates ought to be judged by their willingness to tell their supporters when they have crossed the line.

David Broder is a Washington Post columnist. Contact him by writing to davidbroder@washpost.com.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Monday, Feb. 10

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

bar graph, pie chart and diagrams isolated on white, 3d illustration
Editorial: Don’t let state’s budget numbers intimidate you

With budget discussions starting soon, a new website explains the basics of state’s budget crisis.

Comment: Trump can go only as far as the courts will allow

Most of Trump’s executive orders are likely to face court challenges, setting the limits of presidential power.

Comment: Civil service needs reform; Trump means only to gut it

It’s too difficult to hire and fire federal workers. A grand bargain is possible, but that’s not what Trump seeks.

Saunders: U.S. Iron Dome isn’t feasible now, but it could be

Trump is correct to order a plan for a system that would protect the nation from missile strikes.

Harrop: Trump has no sense of damage from tariff threats

Even if ultimately averted, a trade war with Canada and Mexico could drive both from U.S. exports.

A young man carries water past the destroyed buildings of a neighborhood in the Gaza Strip, Feb. 2, 2025. President Donald Trump’s proposal to “own” the Gaza Strip and transfer its population elsewhere has stirred condemnation and sarcasm, but it addresses a real and serious challenge: the future of Gaza as a secure, peaceful, even prosperous place. (Saher Alghorra/The New York Times)
Comment: ‘Homeland’ means exactly that to Gazans

Palestinians have long resisted resettlement. Trump’s plan to ‘clean out’ Gaza changes nothing.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Sunday, Feb. 9

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Rent stabilization can keep more from losing homes

Thank you to The Herald Editorial Board for its editorial, regarding rent… Continue reading

Don’t pamper young criminals with lenient sentences

I want to give a shout out to Todd Welch for his… Continue reading

Curtains act as doors for a handful of classrooms at Glenwood Elementary on Monday, Sept. 9, 2024 in Lake Stevens, Washington. (Olivia Vanni / The Herald)
Editorial: Schools’ building needs point to election reform

Construction funding requests in Arlington and Lake Stevens show need for a change to bond elections.

FILE- In this Nov. 14, 2017, file photo Jaìme Ceja operates a forklift while loading boxes of Red Delicious apples on to a trailer during his shift in an orchard in Tieton, Wash. Cherry and apple growers in Washington state are worried their exports to China will be hurt by a trade war that escalated on Monday when that country raised import duties on a $3 billion list of products. (Shawn Gust/Yakima Herald-Republic via AP, File)
Editorial: Trade war would harm state’s consumers, jobs

Trump’s threat of tariffs to win non-trade concessions complicates talks, says a state trade advocate.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.