Transparently Two-Faced

Public Campaign Action Fund is now Every Voice. Check out our new website:

The Louisville Courier-Journal, no friend to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), blasts the longtime opponent of campaign finance reform for saying one thing and doing another: praising campaign finance transparency as the corrective on money in politics, then blocking legislation that would create that very transparency. The Journal expresses its considerable displeasure...


For those of you in Kentucky, you got an email from us last week about the project the Sunlight Foundation undertook to find out who put the anonymous hold on S. 223 that would have made Senators file campaign disclosure reports electronically -- the law would have made information on who was giving how much money to whom available to voters faster, and for less money, than the current paper filings. McConnell and fellow Kentucky Senator Jim Bunning (R) worked to block the legislation, and tried to keep it a secret via anonymous hold. It was underhanded and in direct opposition to what McConnell has said before about campaign finance disclosure:


Not content with sticking his finger in the eyes of Kentuckians who scorn his slavish support for George W. Bush and the occupation of Iraq, Sen. McConnell seems to think he also can flout his own long-espoused political principles with no fear of voter retribution.

This great defender of dollar-driven politics -- Washington's self-identified champion of money as the constitutional equivalent of speech -- has always insisted the answer is not less cash in campaigns but more transparency. Trust the voters to figure out who is scratching whose back, he says, by making sure they can find out who is giving what to whom.

Except, of course, when a bill that would let voters do exactly that might actually pass -- then it's time to dig into your bag of dirty tricks to block it. You know, I'm confused -- for a man so enraptured of the almightly dollar, don't you think Sen. McConnell would be all over a bill that would encourage him trumpet his fundraising prowess far and wide, and broadcast his close association with the wealthiest of the wealthiest? Not that a "Big Money Mitch" tattoo wouldn't work as well...