(2 of 4)
Underdogs and Loving It
"The people who I serve believe that the means by which I came to office corrupt me," McCain said in his New Hampshire kickoff in late June. "And that shames me. That shames me. Their contempt is a stain upon my honor, and I cannot live with it." The one he is out to shame, of course, is Bush. In this scenario, McCain is the outsider from Washington, beholden to no one and indeed reviled by many in his own party for his Senate railings against, among other sensitive subjects, the money chase that has taken over American politics. While McCain can claim to have fought the special interests, Bush, the insider from Austin, already has more than $36 million of their money stuffed in his pockets. Indeed, Bush may not be adding armor by forgoing federal matching funds and vowing to raise his target $70 million all by himself thus absolving himself of any debt whatsoever to Ma and Pa Taxpayer. If McCain gets his way, "Bush: Now 100 percent beholden to special interests" will be this front-runner's Achilles' heel.
So it goes with Bradley, or at least that's what we think we heard him say. While McCain has overtly made the money chase the centerpiece of his campaign, Bradley, just as he's done on nearly every other issue, hasn't said much yet at all. "When it comes to reforming the system," says TIME congressional correspondent Jay Carney, "all we know is that he's for it." Bradley's stealth campaign demands only that he exist, in a positive way, as the un-Gore. The vice president has the ghosts of those Buddhist nuns, and, like his boss, lost much of his taste for reform in 1996, when he discovered how much money he was capable of raising. The issue is Bradley's by default, and we will doubtless hear from him on the subject eventually.
A Campaign-Finance Primer
OK, so money and politics are controversial bedfellows but some kinds of money are more evil than others. Here's a rundown:
Soft money: For reformers, the rottenest part of the root. "Soft money" is the unlimited contributions that corporations, lobbyists and unions can give to national parties. In an election year, it gets poured straight into the coffers of the party nominee, or into key Senate races. Both reform bills wending their way through Congress - McCain-Feingold in the Senate and Shays-Meehan in the House - would ban soft money.
Hard money: Not so bad. The source of funds during a primary campaign, "hard money" goes right from the checkbook to the candidate, and is currently capped at $1,000 per person.
PAC: Political Action Committee, essentially a collection of lobbyists funded by a grassroots group of voters interested in a particular issue. Parties have them, but so do, say, environmental groups. PACs can take unlimited contributions, but are limited in how much they can pass on to a particular candidate.