REP. JAMES OBERSTAR, D-SPECIAL INTERESTS

Jonathan Allen of the Webzine Politico found a datum in the most recent Federal Elections Commission report which to me illustrates why politicians in Washington have gotten so out of touch with the concerns and opinions of their constituents.

Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., is chairman of the House Transportation Committee.  He’s represented his northeastern Minnesota district since 1975.

Between June 22 and Sep. 30, Rep. Oberstar raised $233,102 for his re-election campaign.

Just $500 of that — in a single donation from Jane Robbins of Pine City — came from residents of his district.  Most of the rest came from political action committees in Washington.

Led by President Barack Obama, Democrats are trying to make campaign finance an issue, by charging — without a shred of evidence — that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is funding its advertising campaign in part with foreign money.

The flimsy basis for this charge is the Chamber has overseas affiliates for which it charges dues.  Revenue from these dues amounts to less than $100,000 a year.  The Chamber’s budget this year is about $200 million.  The Chamber plans to spend about $50 million on independent advertising this year, mostly on behalf of Republicans. f

It would be illegal to use foreign money for electoral purposes, which is why the Chamber says it keeps these funds segregated.  Democrats have offered no evidence to the contrary. But even if the Chamber used all the money it collects in dues from foreign members for politics, it would amount to less than two tenths of one percent of the money it’s spending on political advertising this year, hardly the threat to democracy the president claims, even if there were a basis to the charge.

Labor unions and liberal groups such as the Sierra Club also collect dues from foreign subsidiaries, but the White House has not denounced them.  And, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Democrats have received twice as much money from political action committees affiliated with foreign companies as Republicans have. 

This is perfectly legal.  The U.S. employees of Toyota or Volkswagen have as much right to contribute to politics as do employees of Chrysler or General Motors.  Maybe more so, since Toyota and Volkswagen haven’t received bailouts from the taxpayers.

Another line of attack from Democrats is that the Chamber and 527 groups (named for the section of the law which authorizes them) such as American Crossroads — which Karl Rove, a former aide to President George Bush, helped set up — needn’t disclose who their donors are, or how much they’ve given.

Again, the hypocrisy is stunning.  Democrats had no complaints when liberal 527s were savaging John McCain in 2008.  In 2004, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs worked for a group which didn’t disclose its donors.  In 2008, so did Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse.

Democrats confuse threats to Democrats with threats to democracy.

La Rochefoucauld said “hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue.” The Democrats certainly are hypocritical.  They don’t object to the campaign finance rules.  They object only to having the rules applyf equally to Republicans and Democrats.

But there is little virtue in the way we fund our campaigns.  Rep. Oberstar illustrates why I think the rules should be changed.

The funding of our politics chiefly by special interests is one big reason why we’re falling off a fiscal cliff.  For an expenditure of millions, special interest groups — be they labor unions or Wall Street bankers — reap billions in taxpayer subsidies.

Our politicians respond more to the special interests which provide them with money than they do to constituents who can provide them only with votes.  Eventually you get to the ludicrous extreme Rep. Oberstar exemplifies.

I’ve argued before that candidates for federal office should be permitted to accept campaign contributions only from citizens of the United States who are registered to vote in the state from which they are seeking election, in amounts of not more than $10,000 per election, or from the political party to which they belong.  No more contributions from PACs, or out of staters, or the minor children of rich people.

This isn’t a panacea.  But if we want our votes to count for more than their dollars do, it’s a step we’d better take.  The sooner, the better.