Campaign Finance Regulations: High Cost, No Benefit

Posted by: Bill of Right
on April 05, 2005 @ 01:22 PM EST

The New York Times digs up the least surprising story I've seen in a while. Discussing "fat cat" homemakers and campaign finance:

Hortense Schur, reached by telephone in Boca Raton, Fla., said her $4,950 contribution to Fernando Ferrer, a Democratic mayoral candidate, "was really not mine, it's my husband's. I don't know much about it." She was one of nine members of the Schur family, some of whom are involved in manufacturing and real estate in New York, who each wrote $4,950 checks to the Ferrer campaign.

"That was handled through my husband's office," she said. "I'm not familiar with it."

Said an expert: "You've got a lot of housewives and spouses, and there is evidence they are being used as proxy donors, which is a more necessary option for a big donor when campaign limits apply."

No way! Unfortunately, loopholes like this mean more regulation, rather than re-thinking the poorly conceived, unenforceable regulations we already have. Absent a new direction on campaign finance, we can count on that. 527 "reform" (527's discussed here) will probably top the agenda.

E-mail this entry to a friend.

[Previous entry: "The Phony Asset Return Argument"] [Next entry: "Woe Canada!"]