[Dales]

You want real campaign finance reform?

Repeal the 17th Amendment.

Without the direct election of Senators, most of the problems with money and influence in the legislative process would be curtailed.

The donations which are used to gain access or to influence positions and votes are used for elections. Senator McCain says that everyone is tainted by it; so let's remove the need for it.

Not only would this minimize the ability of PACs and special interests and big money to influence the Senate, it would also make it so that such influence being applied to the House would take a hit as well. After all, what good would it do special interests to buy approval for something in the House if they cannot do the same in the Senate?

The best campaign finance reform we could ever have is to go back to having Senators appointed for six year terms by the legislative branch of each of their respective states.

[concerned about politics]

Democrats WANT Bush to veto this bill.
Soft money from unions and organizations is their lifeline, and they can also say Bush is a liar ( to justify Clinton) by his "If they send me a bill, I'll sign it.".
Hillary won NY using soft money from out of state. Lazzio tried to get her to sign off on soft money, the very thing she accused Lazzio of using for his campaign, but she refused to do it.
When the Democrats changed the bill in the dark of night, they put the ability to take union dues back in , just in case Bush does sign it.
I don't think the politicians re-read the bill after the democrats snuck the accept union money part back into the bill.
The sneeky Democrats changed that bill horrably. When it hits Bushs' desk, if it does, it will be nothing like the original bill he read before.

[LS]

Amen to that. Yours is one of the first posts I've seen that understands that "democratizing" the Senate election process was a horrible mistake.