The sea of spending drowns out any prospect of intelligent and informative debate in waves of attack mailers, TV and radio ads designed to put a candidate on the defensive and, even more cynically, to disgust voters and suppress their interest in participating in the election. By a conservative estimate, other groups, including our respective national party campaign organizations, spent at least that amount, if not more, either in support or opposition to one of us. Most of these groups successfully operate because of loopholes in existing federal campaign finance laws, which allow attacks to be made on a candidate without triggering the disclosure and source restriction rules that would otherwise be required by federal law. There is a widespread perception that campaign finance practices and efforts to evade current restrictions have increasingly undermined public confidence in our electoral process. But the biggest challenge is to have our voices heard over the constant din of ads and brochures financed by other groups or interests.
Voters deserve to hear the unfiltered words of the candidates.
We may never return to the campaign style of the Lincoln-Douglas debates. But candidates and voters should be able to communicate ideas and challenge policy solutions. But, to do so, the volume needs to be turned down and the best way is to reduce the amount of money in play in campaigns. Prospects for passage in the Senate have improved considerably as a result of the November election. Reformers are close to having the 60 votes they need to beat an anticipated filibuster.