UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE ALLAN CIGLER FAULTS THE NEW LAW FOR NOT REQUIRING FULL DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS BY INTEREST GROUPS. HE ALSO THINKS THE LEGISLATION HELPS INCUMBENTS AT THE EXPENSE OF CHALLENGERS.

CIGLER WROTE A CHAPTER ON THE ROLE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS BY INTEREST GROUPS IN THE 2000 ELECTION. THE BOOK, "FINANCING THE 2000 ELECTION," WAS PUBLISHED BY THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION, A WASHINGTON D-C BASED THINK TANK.

CIGLER SAYS POLITICIANS STAY ACCOUNTABLE TO VOTERS WHEN ELECTIONS ARE COMPETITIVE, AND THEY FEEL THEY MUST PERFORM WELL TO RETAIN THEIR JOBS. BUT HE PREDICTS ONLY ABOUT 15 INCUMBENTS IN THE U-S HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WILL FACE A SERIOUS CHALLENGE IN THIS FALL'S ELECTION. HE SAYS THE NEW CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW DOES NOTHING TO HELP CHALLENGERS.
Cigler: "This bill doesn't seem to me to do very much to make elections more competitive, in part because there's nothing there that makes it easier for challengers to take on incumbents. One of the reforms I've always liked would be reforms to create minimum seed money for challengers out of public funds." (21 sec.)

CIGLER SAYS THE NEW LAW MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT TO CHALLENGE INCUMBENTS, IN PART BECAUSE THE LIMIT FOR INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO CANDIDATES, SO-CALLED HARD MONEY, IS RAISED FROM ONE-THOUSAND TO TWO-THOUSAND DOLLARS.
Cigler: "In fact, one could argue that incumbents are actually aided because there's now an increased ceiling for hard-money contributions. Some of the people in Washington were calling this new legislation the 'Incumbent Safety Act of 2002.'" (15 sec.)

SO-CALLED "SOFT MONEY" CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE NATIONAL POLITICAL PARTIES WILL BE BANNED WHEN THE NEW LAW TAKES EFFECT. THIS IS MONEY THAT THE REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEES USE AT THEIR DISCRETION. UNDER CURRENT LAW, SOFT MONEY CANNOT BE USED TO EXPRESSLY ADVOCATE VOTING FOR A PARTICULAR CANDIDATE. SO THE NATIONAL POLITICAL PARTIES NOW USE SOFT MONEY TO PRODUCE AND BROADCAST NEGATIVE ADS.

CIGLER SAYS THIS BAN ON NATIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS WILL INCREASE CONTRIBUTIONS TO STATE POLITICAL PARTIES, WHICH COULD BE A POSITIVE.
Cigler: "My guess would be that state political parties will now be able to raise more money than they would be previously. That may actually be a plus because much of this can be translated into grassroots activity and 'get out the vote' kinds of activity and so forth." (16 sec.)

CIGLER SAYS INTEREST GROUPS WILL STILL BE ALLOWED TO RUN ISSUE ADVERTISEMENTS, AS LONG AS THEY DON'T EXPLICITLY ENCOURAGE VOTING FOR A PARTICULAR CANDIDATE. THESE ADS HAD BEEN UNREGULATED. UNDER THE NEW LAW THEY WILL BE BANNED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE ELECTION. THE PROBLEM, CIGLER SAYS, IS THAT THE NEW LAW DOESN'T REQUIRE THESE GROUPS TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES CLEARLY IN ADS.
Cigler: "For example, when a group is advertising, we ought to know who they are and we ought to know where they get their money. We shouldn't probably try to limit what they say." (9 sec.)

CIGLER SAYS THE COURTS LIKELY WILL AND PROBABLY SHOULD STRIKE DOWN ANY LIMITATIONS ON CAMPAIGN ADVERTISING BY INTEREST GROUPS.
Cigler: "The editor of a local newspaper can distribute his or her newspaper all over the constitutency advocating a candidate and that is protected by freedom of the press. Why can't an individual running pamphlets or news ads do the same thing? I don't see any difference."(17 sec.)

CIGLER SAYS THESE ISSUE ADS OFTEN CONFUSE VOTERS, WHICH CAN MAKE THEM MORE CYNICAL ABOUT THE ELECTION PROCESS. AND THESE ADS DON'T NECESSARILY HELP A CANDIDATE STICK TO A CAMPAIGN AGENDA.
Cigler: "The electorate doesn't distinguish between campaign ads by the candidate and some of these ads by the groups. That creates a real problem. Sometimes in some races, the agenda of the campaign actually gets away from the candidates because of the activity of the groups."(15 sec.)

CIGLER BELIEVES INTEREST GROUPS TYPICALLY GIVE MONEY TO POLITICIANS NOT TO BUY VOTES BUT TO BE LEFT ALONE.
Cigler: "I've always thought that you give money not to be regulated. And you can never prove the relationship in a cause and effect on a vote. Money is given so bad things don't happen to you. That's why tobacco for years and years gave money to both political parties." (16 sec.)