McCain's Own Loophole, & His Takeover of Local Reporting

John McCain, like far too many politicians, enjoys telling others what to do. And as his efforts to promote "campaign finance reform" show, he also enjoys telling others what they may, or may not, say, and how they may say it. That's because he wants to control the flow of money into politics to benefit causes with which he agrees -- that would be, mostly, John McCain -- and to the detriment of causes he finds threatening to the old guard's hold on power. That would be, as last week's news from FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith demonstrated, the Internet and other open spaces where speech is unregulated and unfettered. There's more, of course: McCain has launched what would amount to a federal takeover of local television stations' ability to gather and deliver local news as they see fit. More about that in a minute.

McCain, again like too many politicians, wants to have it both ways. What's good for the goose is decidedly not always good for the gander. So while the Senator is happy, indeed even eager, to pile on regulations that limit the ability of the rest of us to influence politics, he's found a way to do an end run around both principal and the law. It's called the Reform Institute, he runs it, it raises money to promote him and his ideas, and it's all perfectly legal. Why? Because, of course, he has hot shot lawyers at his disposal who can craft loopholes into the laws they write for McCain himself.

This morning's New York Times runs a page one story on this organization, which is McCain's pet nonprofit 501 (c) (3). He is chairman of the advisory committee. Here's a bit of what the Times says about this little-known cash cow:

Well, yes you do. And it helps if you don't have to worry about those damnable campaign laws advocated and put into place by people like -- John McCain, the man whose attack dogs spent a few hours last week smearing the reputation of FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith. The man who tried to prevent Smith from gaining his seat on the FEC after Bill Clinton, following precedent, nominated Smith on the recommendation of Trent Lott.

Of course, not everyone is fooled:

Indeed. But what matters to men like McCain and his allies isn't so much that the playing field is leveled, or that mammon is banned before it corrupts another innocent soul. No, what matters is that he continues to receive press accolades from the chattering classes for whom the status quo is as heaven. Inasmuch as these "reformers" can make fundraising more difficult for their erstwhile competition, they further secure their own holds on office. And if they can extend their "reform" efforts to those pesky bloggers who refuse to play by the rules, well, it's time to break out the champagne. As long as others are paying for it, of course.

How odd it is that, given its ties to the man who would reign in freewheeling political debate, the Reform Institute lists as its first role:

They're for "breaking down barriers that hinder civic participation in the political process and free the political system from the influences of special interests." Really? What could be more civic in nature, in the Burkean sense of "little platoons," than independent bloggers employing new technology to voice their opinions and do their own investigative work? And where would you find any group of people who have fewer ties to those dreaded "special interests"?

Not at the Reform Institute, that's for sure. Again, the Times:

Gosh, Senator McCain, sure sounds like a loophole to me.

But the Institute has important goals, such as telling local broadcast networks how to fill their hours on the air. Are you unsatisfied with the content of your local station? Worry not: Senator McCain is going to take it over, after a fashion, by forcing it to conform to his vision of what a station should be, what it should report, how it should report it.

How do you do this in America? Simple: threaten to deny the station its broadcast license unless it conforms to government demands. Here's what the Reform Institute's web site says about it:

Here's some of what McCain said about his act at a press conference last month:

Since the Senator now "feels" it's time for a federal takeover of local broadcast news stations. Make no mistake: this would be the effect of this legislation. Do Americans really want Washington telling their local broadcast stations what they may or may not broadcast as news? Do we need to have the content of our our airwaves devoted to news dictated by a man who smears his opponents, rigs the system in his own favor, and then exploits custom loopholes for his own advancement?

More:

John McCain is a power-hungry man who is happy to destroy those who oppose him, and who finds free speech threatening. Even leaving aside the antiquated notions of the public airwaves and their uses -- cable television, the Internet, and other forms of media long ago reduced the percentage of Americans who rely solely on broadcast news to stay informed to a tiny percentage of the population -- this is regulatory overkill that should be resisted. The airwaves, the Internet, campaign financing -- this man's ambitions to control what we can see, read, and hear know no bounds. It's time to call him out and defeat these nefarious regulations before they further erode our rights.

Update: Via Michelle Malkin, Captain Ed has been researching the story, and what he finds makes McCain look even worse than anything the Times dug up. Ed also links to a new AP story on McCain and the Reform Institute.

Among the donors to the Reform Institute: McCain's RI is funded by: George Soros's OSI; Teresa Heinz Kerry's favorite, the Tides Foundation; NARAL; and the Proteus Fund, which promotes gay marriage.

Think about this: McCain runs in Arizona as a conservative (if, as the media love to say, "maverick") Republican. He's pro-life, pro-NRA, and socially conservative. Yet he takes money, it seems, from anyone with a need to buy influence in Washington through a wonderful little loophole he himself designed as part of his eponymous campaign finance reform legislation. There's a word for such people, but I'll refrain from stating it.

See the AP article, in particular, for condemnations from McCain's allies in campaign finance reform efforts, including Larry Noble of the Center for Responsive Politics, and Kent Cooper, who runs the Political Money Line.

Update II: Guess where you can read the full text of Senator McCain's statement to the Senate to introduce the Localism in Broadcasting Reform Act of 2005 back on February 15? Try the Campaign Legal Center, run by Trevor Potter, McCain's former general counsel and the same folks who smeared Bradley Smith in last week's press release.

Can you say "nest of vipers"?

Update III: Michelle now reports, via National Journal's Technology Daily (subscription required) that Sen. Feingold's website has the following text:

This assurance echoes that of Ellen Weintraub (above), stating that nothing has been decided yet, and that there will be "ample opportunity for comment and debate."

We've seen this morning how Sen. McCain has worked the loopholes of his own legislation to raise money, keep his staff active, and promote his causes, and that he'll gladly accept any check that doesn't bounce, regardless of the source. Given all that we've learned about him and his crew, ask yourself how it stacks up against the warnings of Bradley Smith and other critics of FEC regulation of political speech.

The question is not now, nor has it ever been, one of "reform." It's a question of control -- of power -- pure and simple. Control the flow of money, and you control the ability of citizens to voice their support for, or opposition to, a candidate through their checkbooks. Toss in, by the way, McCain's grab for control of how much time local news networks must spend on "local" stories (see above in this post), and you see that a pattern has emerged. And it isn't the type that anyone who cares about free speech should find comforting.