From Reel to Real, Politics Is Adrift on a Sea of Green

SACRAMENTO —  U.S. Sen. Jay Billington Bulworth said it well. Actually, he rapped it in a Beverly Wilshire Hotel ballroom at a campaign fund-raiser:

As long as you can pay

I’m gonna do it all your way.

Yes the money talks

And the people walks!

The California senator was fictitious. But his words in the 1998 movie “Bulworth” touched on reality. Later, in gang-banger duds, he rapped to a TV interviewer:

I’m a senator. I got to raise $10,000 a

day every day I’m in Washington.

I ain’t gettin’ it in South-Central,

I’m gettin’ it in Beverly Hills.

So I’m votin’ in the Senate

The way they want me to

And I’m sendin’ ‘em my bills.

A stretch, but not that far from the truth in too many cases.

Bulworth’s creator--actor/writer/director Warren Beatty--also said it well last week when he used his stardom and the fiction of a possible presidential candidacy to attract 150 celebrity-gawking reporters to a Beverly Hills speech:

“The primary cancer in this sick system--the big money in politics--has so metastasized into every area of government that we can’t afford any longer to ignore that the life of the patient--American democracy--is in mortal danger.

“Getting the money to win makes decent politicians do indecent things.”

*

OK, Beatty is just an actor, and Bulworth is only a character. But some politicians are courageous and candid enough to agree publicly.

U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the underdog presidential candidate, repeatedly calls our political system “corrupt,” thus riling his colleagues.

McCain has been trying to outlaw “soft money.” These are donations by corporations and unions to political parties, ostensibly for “party building.” In reality, the money is laundered into projects that indirectly benefit presidential and congressional candidates. It circumvents the candidates’ spending and contribution limits, as well as the ban on corporate and labor campaign donations.

But McCain’s bill doesn’t have much hope. You won’t find many politicians, in Washington or Sacramento, pushing for reform because they’re prospering politically from the present system.

Democratic presidential candidate Bill Bradley, however, is another politician who advocates banning soft money. He’d use public funds to help finance congressional races in general elections.

Five years ago, the California Legislature passed a Democratic-sponsored bill that included partial public financing of legislative campaigns, along with contribution and spending limits. But many cynical lawmakers voted for the measure only because they knew Gov. Pete Wilson would veto it, which he did.

You don’t need to watch a movie to see corruption. You can come to the state Capitol. During the final weeks of every legislative session, when lawmakers vote up or down on hundreds of special interest bills, there’s a frenzy of fund-raising that’s legal extortion.

Then there’s the governor. A record $6.3 million was raised by Gov. Gray Davis during his first six months in office, mainly from special interests currying favor.

*

It would be hard to imagine two men more different from Warren Beatty in style and magnetism than computer nerd Ron Unz and former bureaucrat Tony Miller. But each is trying, in his own way, to reform campaign financing.

“We’ve got an entirely corrupt political system,” contends Unz, who last year sponsored the ballot initiative that scrapped California’s bilingual education program and Tuesday announced he’s a U.S. Senate candidate. Unz and Miller, a former acting secretary of state, have teamed to place a campaign reform measure on the March 7 ballot.

It was just three years ago that voters passed another such measure, Prop. 208, but it is stalled in a federal court because the judge suspects the contribution limits are too low. The Unz-Miller measure counters with significantly higher limits--$5,000 for gubernatorial candidates and $3,000 for others. It also would ban corporate contributions; unions and other special interests would be limited to no more than $50,000 total for all candidates.

Beyond that, there’d be public financing--free TV ads and mailers--for candidates who agree to spending limits. This would cost taxpayers $40 million a year.

Beatty advocates 100% public financing of all federal elections. He estimates it would cost each American $3.50 per year. “The public will never have democracy until it’s willing to pay the bill,” he asserts.

The Beatty presidential speculation is off the mark, but his pitch about political corruption is right on target.

Like Bulworth says, you get what you pay for. Either you buy the politicians or the special interests do.