McCain rejection of public funding is ironic position

The recent decision by Sen. John McCain to reject public campaign funding is an ironic step for the Arizona senator who is the all-but-certain Republican presidential nominee.

He has advocated campaign finance reforms, including limitations on fundraising from special interest groups and on campaign spending. His name is stamped on one of the pivotal pieces of campaign finance legislation, the McCain-Feingold reform bill - a law that angered members of his own Republican Party and one of the reasons GOP conservatives reject him.

So why would he back away from public campaign funds? McCain realized, like many other candidates, that public campaign financing hog-ties candidates, especially when your opponent doesn't participate in the system.

Last year McCain wanted funds from the federal election financing system, which distributes money to candidates from a fund that contains money from a $3 voluntary contribution given by taxpayers when they file their taxes. Early-on, he was considered a lackluster candidate and had difficulty raising money on his own.

Last week, however, he asked the Federal Election Commission to withdraw his request for public money for his primary campaign. The reason was simple: his campaign successes had opened the wallets on contributors and taking public funds would limit what he could raise and spend. And that was a real handicap against opponent Mitt Romney who could use not only contributions, but his own wealth.

He could still ask for public financing - as much as $85 million - to campaign for the general election, as can other presidential candidates. Whether he does or not will probably depend on how successful he is in raising money on his own and whether his opponens agree to public financing limits.

While McCain's rejection of public campaign funds is a political decision, which is a perfectly fine basis for a candidate's decisions, it really should be based on fundamental right of free expression. Any attempt to limit campaign financing or on campaigning in general is also a limit on the ability of a candidates to use the right of free speech guaranteed by our Constitution.

Campaign spending, as whatever level a candidate chooses, is one of the major ways that an individual can reach voters in our mass media society. If government limits that ability, then it improperly interferes in the election process.

Unfortunately, McCain and the U.S. Supreme Court don't agree. They believe it is proper to limit campaigning.

Their viewpoint is wrong, as demonstrated by candidates who are voluntarily opting out of the system because they know it limits their free speech - even ones like McCain, who has supported such campaign "reforms."