If McCain-Feingold were the law of the land, 99.5 percent of independent expenditure ads run in the last 60 days of Election 2000 would have had to come clean about who was behind them, as they were clearly aimed at electing specific candidates and not at illuminating ideas and issues. The bill would also substantially reduce the toxicity of the political environment since the study proves that the most negative ads are run by groups hiding behind sham names and committees.
People are a lot keener to throw mud when they can do it anonymously.
As a result 72 percent of interest-group ads were attack ads, while the vast majority of ads paid for by candidates were used to puff up their images. Given the freedom from accountability such stealth ad campaigns provide, it s not surprising that some very strange bedfellows have united to stop a bill that would make it harder for them to continue their assault on our democracy all the while claiming, of course, that it s in defense of the First Amendment. The NRA, the National Right to Life Committee, the Christian Coalition and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce held a press conference earlier this month along with the ACLU to attack McCain-Feingold. But if McCain-Feingold were really about protecting incumbents, it would have passed a long time ago. The Christian Coalition went even further, fretting that the bill could effectively put our voter education and issue advocacy activities at serious risk.