Gore might have expected that sort of opposition, but he may well find he's pushing a bill of goods that's universally unsalable. First, there is the question of what incentive there would be to contribute to a central campaign coffer, because of both bipartisanship "I don't want my hard-earned greenbacks going to those darned Democrats/rotten Republicans" and the perception that access to candidates would be diminished. In addition, it's doubtful that he can even count on support from fellow Democrats. "There's general agreement that the only reason Democrats vote for these campaign finance overhaul packages is because they know they're virtually guaranteed to fail," says TIME Washington correspondent Karen Tumulty. That way, they can say they did "the right thing" without having to deal with the ramifications. After all, Dems need cash just as much as their Republican rivals; in addition, the fund would also end the advantage that incumbent members of Congress have in fund-raising (and thus in electability).
But even though the response in Washington has been lukewarm, Gore's proposal could serve him well on one front. He's managed to paint his opponent, George W. Bush, into something of a corner. After all, at this point, Bush's options are limited: He can scoff at Gore's proposal and risk looking like he's addicted to soft money, or he can try to capitalize on popular antipathy toward unregulated fund-raising and look like he's just following Gore's lead.