alt.politics.economics

"Harry Dope" wrote in message
news:47b7435d$0$6146$4c368faf@...
> Mr. Obama's Waffle
>
> His commitment to pursue public financing for the fall campaign suddenly
> looks soft.
>

AExcept no one can produce a statement either from him or his campaign
pledging to use public financing.

Apparently McCain used his powers as a psychic to determine that Obama made
this promise.

Larry

> /wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/15/?hpid=opinionsbox1
>
> Saturday, February 16, 2008; Page A20
>
> AS RECENTLY as November, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was unequivocal about
> whether he would agree to take public financing for the general election
> if his Republican opponent pledged to do the same. "If you are nominated
> for president in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private
> funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the
> presidential public financing system?" the Midwest Democracy Network asked
> in a questionnaire. Mr. Obama's answer was clear. "Yes," he wrote. "If I
> am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with
> the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."
>
> Or maybe not. Mr. Obama deserves credit for obtaining a ruling from the
> Federal Election Commission that allowed him to raise money for the
> general election campaign but reserve the right to return the funds if he
> were to win the nomination and manage to arrange a cease-fire with the
> other side. That outcome, once improbable, is now within reach. The
> presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, agreed long
> ago to Mr. Obama's deal, back when his prospects for securing the
> nomination seemed slim. Mr. McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis,
> reaffirmed that pledge this week at a lunch with reporters sponsored by
> the Christian Science Monitor.
>
> But Mr. Obama's campaign, which has been raking in money at an astonishing
> clip of more than $30 million a month, is starting to hedge. Speaking to
> the Associated Press, Mr. Obama's spokesman, Bill Burton, downgraded the
> Obama plan to "something that we pursued with the FEC and it was an option
> that we wanted on the table and is on the table." Asked about the
> campaign's earlier position, Mr. Burton said, "No, there is no pledge."
>
> It must be tempting for a campaign that has reached dizzying new financial
> heights to give up the guarantee of $85 million in federal funds for the
> prospect of being able to rake in even more -- and to get a financial edge
> over an opponent whose fundraising has been lackluster and whose party
> seems dispirited. It must be chastening to think about the financial
> advantage that Mr. McCain will have in the months leading up to the
> convention, when Mr. Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (.), his
> remaining Democratic opponent, may still be battling for the nomination
> while Mr. McCain is spending "primary" money to build the necessary
> architecture for the general election.
>
> But this kind of backtracking and parsing isn't what the millions of
> voters who have been inspired by Mr. Obama are looking for. It's not
> befitting Mr. Obama's well-earned image as a champion of reform. Instead
> of waffling, Mr. Obama should be pushing Ms. Clinton to go beyond her
> spokesman's statements that she would "definitely consider" forgoing
> public financing.
>
> Why not let the candidates raise as much cash as they can and save the
> taxpayers' money? Because it's better for voters if candidates spend more
> time talking to them and less time cozying up to donors. It's better for
> democracy if candidates are less indebted to big bundlers who have raked
> in six- or seven-figure amounts for their campaigns. Mr. McCain seems to
> understand this. What about the Democrats?
>
>