American Politics Journal

Money Talks
It's just that the press doesn't think that you know that already
by Jeff Koopersmith

Monday, March 17th, 1997 -- NEW YORK (APJP) -- Talk show host David Letterman once said, "Taking bribes from crooked Indonesian businessmen really alienated crooked American businessmen."

This quip, like many, gives rise to a series of truths and questions. Did "Communist" China try to subvert the American political system? Are businessmen paid off with policies favoring their bottom lines in exchange for fat political checks? Is it a crime to call a supporter for money from the White House?

The answers are a resounding "Maybe."

As rumors grow, so does pressure on reporters and columnists to get the next scandal-charged scoop. This sense of urgency has reversed the media tone favoring the President, resulting in an out-and-out witch hunt in this nation's capitol, with few facts to back it up.

Last week the gloves came off, and any remnant of a honeymoon between the so-called "liberal" press and the White House came to a stinging end as Press Secretary Mike McCurry lashed out at the press corps for promoting innuendo as fact. In fact, McCurry's tongue-lashing was so vicious that members of journalism's elite sitting in the White House press room could be heard catcalling and wailing, "How could you say that about us? How could you?"

The answer was clear. The White House was on the offensive, after two months of defensive posturing which hadn't worked.

Vice President Al Gore, followed by President Clinton, made it clear that there were no apologies in store for their roles in raising money for the 1996 election cycle. The President was so bold as to suggest that he too may have made fundraising calls from the White House -- normally a precursor to admission.

Attorney General Janet Reno stood fast in her resolve not to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate fundraising at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue -- for the time being, at least. Logic suggests that any such appointment would probably include a charge to investigate congressional fundraising as well. Carnivorous Capitol legislators might want to employ a bit of caution before pressing too hard for an impossible-to-control prosecutor who might ferret out a lot more than they bargained for.

Meanwhile, from the Northeast to the Heartland to the West Coast, American voters just yawned.

"What's new?," they thought, as nearly 70% of them showed no surprise that candidates -- even sitting presidents -- got into the act of raising some of the $2 billion spent on politics last year.

As James Carville has said, "How do they think campaign contributions get there anyway? The Stork?" It's this bit of insight that sums up the reality of politics and life in general: money gets attention.

It's the American way. People with money get heard, and their suggestions do not go unnoticed. They get preference in nearly everything. They hire smarter lawyers, go to better restaurants, wear finer clothes and sip costlier wine. They live in larger houses, fly first class and even get superior treatment from valet parking attendants. Why then would Americans think this privilege does not extend to influence in Washington?

As a matter of fact, we've known that all along, and all the media-driven breast beating in the world won't convince us that the wool's been pulled over our eyes. We get it. Money buys influence. The world is unfair. Politicians are sometimes less than forthright.

With that out the way, let's look at some facts.

Not only does China try to influence policy, but more than 100 nations maintain expensive offices in Washington to do exactly the same thing. They have parties and invite elected officials. They have legislative liaisons to plead the case for their country before Congressional committees and White House staff.

Can you blame them? The United States is the only superpower. What we do affects most people worldwide.

And what about business? Thousands of corporations either have Washington offices that do little else than attempt to influence legislative policy. Others do the same through more than 30,000 attorney-lobbyists whose sole function is to increase profits.

Those of us mere mortals who belong to a union or a woman's group or the Sierra Club, Common Cause or the Boy Scouts get in our two cents as well.

In Washington, as in most places, the squeaky wheel gets the grease -- especially when votes, money, or both are at stake.

A simple truth that many of my overzealous colleagues seem to ignore is that we already know everyone's trying to control the field. What we're counting on are elected officials responsible enough to keep the bullies in check and the country on the right track.

When a reporter or columnist insinuates potential campaign corruption, they should be prepared to show some unassailable facts.

Otherwise we might begin to believe they are ruining people for sport -- or for a Pulitzer Prize.