The American Mind

On abortion Fred Thompson has a history of mixed statements but a solid, pro-life voting record. If he and his staff would have explained himself better the flap over lobbying for an abortion group would have been settled for the three people who seem to care. There is another issue where Thompson cuts against most conservatives only there’s a lengthy, action-based history: campaign finance reform. Jim Geraghty received a few stories from a Thompson-hater showing how involved he was in the first amendment restriction legislation.

In 01.2001 Thompson said,

One of my first priorities when I arrived in Washington six years ago was to reform the campaign finance system in this country, and I believe that this may be the best opportunity we’ve had to pass real reform since this fight began. I am optimistic that we’re making substantial progress toward fixing a broken system that breeds cynicism and apathy among out citizens.

In 03.2002 he said:

This legislation will help to reform a campaign finance system that was becoming more and more dependent on huge soft money contributions and leaving room for fewer and fewer people to be involved in the process.

Thompson did do good in raising the hard money donation cap from $1000 to $2000 and indexed it to inflation. But Geraghty’s final question is key: “[W]hat does Thompson think of the legislation today?”

Fred has taken full advantage of citizen media to build buzz and talk more directly to supporters. A few years ago he may have seen the internet as just another loophole for unlimited campaign contributions. I have a feeling on McCain-Feingold are a bit different. What he has to do is tell us what he thinks.

“Somebody Wants You To Know About Fred Thompson and Campaign Finance Reform” [via Hot Air]

UPDATE: Pete Fanning links to a John Fund interview with Thompson. He’s turning on the bill he pushed:

Indeed, the issue of campaign finance has been on his mind of late. Perhaps the single biggest beef conservatives have with his voting record is his backing of the campaign finance law sponsored by his friend John McCain. His repeated votes for that measure are the major reason his lifetime score by the American Conservative Union was only 86 percent. Mr. Thompson won’t retreat from his belief that fundamental reform of a broken campaign finance system is needed. “There are problems with people giving politicians large sums of money and then asking them to pass legislation,” he states matter-of-factly. Still, he makes clear he understands the need for people to participate in the political process — he proposed the amendment to raise the $1,000 per person “hard money” federal contribution limit to the current limit of $2,300.

But there is a chance his thinking may evolve even further. Conceding that McCain-Feingold hasn’t worked as intended, and is being riddled with new loopholes, he throws his hands open in exasperation. “I’m not prepared to go there yet, but I wonder if we shouldn’t just take off the limits and have full disclosure with harsh penalties for not reporting everything on the Internet immediately.”

I’m a little disturbed at Thompson saying we need more restrictive campaign finance laws because “There are problems with people giving politicians large sums of money and then asking them to pass legislation.” There are laws already on the books to combat that. They’re called bribery laws.

Thompson hasn’t back away from McCain-Feingold and its first amendment restrictions. He’s only reconsidering it. That’s better than Sen. McCain, but not on the same page as Mitt Romney who wants McCain-Feingold trashed. I am glad Fred is willing to examine his preconceptions and admit he might have been wrong.

The problem is the closer Thompson comes to Election Day the thougher it will be for him to oppose McCain-Feingold without being labeled a flip-flopper.

Pete says I’m dredging up an old issue. No, I’m treating Thompson with the same respect as the other Republican candidates. I’m putting him under the same microscope as Tommy Thompson and Rep. Ron Paul, the two I’ve written the most about. If you look closely there are no endorsing buttons for any candidate on my weblog. I’m still in wait-and-see mode. We’re six months from the first primaries and caucuses. I have plenty of time to poke, observe, and write about these guys before I pick.