|
The distinction between "good" and "bad" political fund-raising can sometimes be pretty hard for the uninitiated to discern.
John Huang -- the Democratic Party glad-hander who has come under fire for the trade favors he may have promised his party's foreign contributors -- organized fund-raisers in both 1988 and 1994 for Nevada Democratic Sen. Richard Bryan. Most of the contributors at those fund-raisers were from the financial community, which makes sense, given that Sen. Bryan sits on the Senate Banking Committee.
It makes sense, that is, once one accepts the notion that it's OK for politicians to solicit contributions from the very businessmen they plan to regulate.
That is precisely the common assumption, of course, which is why Sen. Bryan saw no problem with accepting the money rounded up at the bankers' dinners, until Mr. Huang's methods became the focus of unwelcome recent scrutiny.
On the bright side, once questions were raised about the cash, Sen. Bryan acknowledged, "There was no way to determine the circumstances of each individual's contribution at the two fund-raisers, and I directed that the money be returned."
Sen. Bryan did the right thing.
Less encouraging is the response of our senior senator. When Sen. Harry Reid recently asked an aide to check his campaign records for any contributions by Mr. Huang, he turned up $500, which the senator decided to turn over to two Nevada churches "because I'd rather see it go to charity."
But forwarding campaign contributions to a third party -- even a church -- would be better characterized not as "returning" the money, but as "funneling" it.
Many a church has shown an historical preference for one party or another, and many churchgoers might be expected to hold in kindly regard an officeholder who helps fund their house of worship.
If he judges it either ethically or politically advisable to return the funds, then Mr. Reid should actually return them ... not spread them around.
Agree or disagree? Write us at letters@lvrj.com
|
|
