Ethics expert: Obama public funding decision 'praiseworthy'
Barack Obama's decision this week to opt out of public campaign funding, breaking his earlier pledge to accept it if his opponent did, is generating fierce debate.
For example, the Associated Press's Liz Sidoti has charged that "Barack Obama chose winning over his word ... and with that, the first-term Illinois senator tarnished his carefully honed image as a different kind of politician." Sidoti's article was described by blogger Attaturk at firedoglake as "a mash note to John McCain" -- even though Sidoti did point out that McCain falls short of his image as a reformer as well.
ABC's The Note has similarly described Obama as the second coming of George Bush, saying, "Obama made a coldly calculating decision based on a desire to win. He tossed aside a pledge rather than throwing away the single biggest advantage he enjoys over his rival." However, the ABC writers go on to say that Obama "made a very good political move -- probably the only move that spared him the wrath of his own party. It's almost certainly the move that gives him the best chance to actually win."
Bruce Weinstein, who writes an ethics column for Business Week, told CNN's Kiran Chetry on Friday that he sees Obama's action not as coldly calculating, but as "praiseworthy," because "it's important to keep a promise, but there are other things sometimes that are more important. ... Let's say you promise your daughter you're going to take her whitewater rafting ... but it turns out that weekend the river is raging. You would say, 'In this case, it's more important to avoid the danger of the water than to keep my promise.'"
"The spirit of the law that John McCain co-sponsored in 2002 was an attempt to make sure that everyone's voice is heard," Weinstein went on. "But the way it's played out, unfortunately, is that some special interests and political action committees are able to bypass the spirit of the law and to raise funds and engage in some unfortunate activities. And I think that's what Obama is trying to avoid, to make sure that everyone's voice is heard."
The argument that Obama needs to reject public funding because of massive spending by special interests is not without its own critics. Jonathan Martin at Politico, suggests that "Obama's alarmist prophecy -- a bit of typical campaign rhetoric meant to scare his own donors into reaching for their credit cards -- is wildly at odds with the flatlined state of conservative third-party efforts. ... The truth is that, less than five months before Election Day, there are no serious anti-Obama 527s in existence nor are there any immediate plans to create such a group."
Bloomberg.com even reports that some Republicans see Obama's move as meaning "that McCain supporters will be more likely to open their wallets to outside groups."
However, one blogger, Jill Kuraitis at New West Blog, believes there are longer-term goals involved. She writes, "Some of Obama's own allies in the fight for strict ethics in campaign financing are ticked off about the public financing refusal. ... That could be awkward, but Obama seems determined. It appears he's made a sweeping decision to try to send a message to voters that it's time to call bull on the tweaking and faking and feinting that government officials engage in when they talk about campaign finance reform. ... Such a big decision by the front-runner for the presidency signals a willingness to make hard choices."
This video is from CNN's American Morning, broadcast June 20, 2008.
Download video
| 
