The whole notion of campaign finance reform is utterly laughable. The reason being that the captain-of-the-ship doctrine does not apply. Oh sure, various and sundry small fry get arrested; some actually get convicted and go to jail. But, where has there ever been an election where the candidate himself was denied the office strictly on the basis of violating election laws.
For instance, how much did Obama raise illegally. We have good reason to believe that many of the fraud screening provisions for his credit card operations were turned off. What did that cash buy? What was its role in swaying voters? Did it provide the margin for victory?
But, Obama will get away with it. What really counts is he, regardless of any wrong doing found, will occupy the Oval Office on January 20. What does it matter that some low level campaign operative may be found guilty of violating campaign law? The real prize and goal of this chicanery is winning the presidency. If that goes to Obama, then the law-breaking was worth it.
The only lesson to be taken from Obama’s campaign practices is that they work. Future campaigns will forever shun public financing. Future campaigns will amplify on Obama’s fund raising tactics. The real lesson, that crime doesn’t pay, would only come if the election was denied to Obama on the basis of campaign law violations.
Now, we have the Senatorial race in Minnesota. (here and here) On election night, Coleman was up by a narrow 700 or so votes. But, mysteriously that total, before the recount, has been cut by some 500 votes with ballots mysteriously showing up from all over the place. I’ll pass over Minnesota’s secretary of state being a ACORN flunkie.
Then, we have a situation in Hennepin County (Minneapolis and suburbs) were, because of a electronic breakdown, votes were not electronically from the precincts on election night. Rather, the results were transported by car to City Hall. In other words, we have a break in the chain of custody. And, every vote, thus handled, become suspect and tainted.
Now, if we really wanted to uphold up election laws to maintain ballot integrity, I would submit that these votes need to be thrown out. If thrown out, you would finally put teeth into election laws because you would actually have the ability to deny the likely beneficiary of elective office. You would finally have a real deterrent to campaign and vote violations. You may even have legislative incentive to actually create a clear and transparent system of vote accountability.