WASHINGTON (CNN) In an e-mail message, Obama said the decision means that his campaign will forgo about $85 million in public funds that would be available when he officially becomes the Democratic presidential nominee in August.
He will still out raise McCain
All the way to the casa de blanco
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 51
More Comment Graphics
Why is it hard for you to understand that this man will stand behind his principles? Get used to it; I think he will keep on surprising you.
and then he's going to put a whoppin on him not seen since Nixon in 1972
The money would not come from the Dems , Delores , it would come from the empty US treasury.
Go Obama.
As for why, that's a damned good question. But he *did* promise that he would stick with the public funding limitations if McCain agreed. (source)
In fact, Mr. Obama stopped short of making a flat promise to participate in the public financing system. Asked in a questionnaire whether he would take part if his opponents did the same, Mr. Obama wrote yes. But he added, "If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election." (source)
From what I can tell, it doesn't look like there was any real effort to reach an agreement.
Huh? Does nobody read the Constitution?
Don't believe the SPIN.
kitchenMage....Yes, I know what the Constitution say but obviously, Obama doesn't. He acts like he is running against Bush and not McCain. When is Obama going to go toe-to-toe with McCain and leave Bush out of it??
Ivan, nobody said Bush until you. Nice try, though.
then the small donors kicked it up a noch,
and now he's sitting on over $260 mil!
A guy just said on CNN, "Show me the money"
bullcrap!
SHOW ME THE BIG WHITE HOUSE!
besides the G.O.P. has always used the 527's to cripple democracts
this will be the first time in a long time
that the dems will have an advantage.
you don't like it, move to CANADA.
shmuck
We desperately need more campaign finance reform. As Obama said, "The system is broken."
McCain can't raise 84 million for two months (public financing kicks in after convention).
bush is out raising money for him, using precious resources and our tax dollars, but not allowing any photos or media, because McCain doesn't want to be tied to him.
"This is not a good decision. While the current public financing system for the presidential primaries is broken, the system for the general election is not," he said.
Most people don't like the idea of spending taxes for elections, but there is a positive side to it. The bad thing about not doing it is that big money will rule more than ever in the future, and it is not as transparent where it comes from. All this and the outside 527 monies are in play....
While I believe that we should have public funding mandatory for elections, I can certainly understand Obama's decision to forgo them. If he can come up with more money on his own, and it appears he can, he would be a fool to accept the limitation. Who wants a fool for president?
Obama will go toe to to with McCain when the time comes as in the debates. While I'm sure McCain will be glad he is not debating Mrs. Clinton, I'm also sure that Obama will be a challenge to McCain as well.
And his running against Bush is only good campaign strategy. Every Republican would like to run against Carter. That is simply how the game is played.
Whatever the result, it is going to be an interesting race! A black man for the first time in history, against a well respected candidate, the strongest the Republicans had to offer. Unfortunately, McCain has flipped flopped on so many things that his stance is no longer that of the maverick who thinks for himself and works across party lines. That is why it is so easy to brand him as Bush's third term.
What he says is that the campaign finance scheme is already "broken" and the Republicans have learned how to game the system, using "private" outfits like the Swift Boaters to smear him independently of McCain's money. That's how Kerry got suckered, and Obama is not going to fall for the same sucker punch.
I think he is right to use the huge inflow of money from people like me...just regular folks who don't give thousands. Most of Obama's contributors are like me...less than $200. So he can come back to us and ask for more legally...and we will give him more! He's gonna bury McCain. No amount of attack ads from the Swift Boaters will work, as they did against Kerry, because he ran out of money. This time, the people will hear the true story. The Democrats, for a change, are not the "poor losers." We are gonna be the winners.
Bert, this is what I've been saying for a while.
People act like their scared to say it.
It's going to happen.
Bigger than 1972!
Honestly, I don't understand why such incredible amounts of money must be spent on campaigns. Really, it's not necessary to visit every nook and cranny of the US. We all have tv, radio, and many of us have the glorious internet where anyone can post on a variety of different venues. I would love to see a candiate spend less and still win. Show me you can do it on a shoestring, without a government handout. That's how many Americans live.
Alguien señalando error
shmuck"
Fred R
I agree Fred!
How many times have we had the wingnuts tell us to move to Cuba if we didn't like this country's rightwing neocon ideologies.
Now the shoe is on the other foot, and we can tell them to move somewhere else if they do not like it!
Let them move to some fascist country that supports their ideologies.
Can some of you other commenter's make some suggestions for a nice fascist country to move to after the election?
Help me out please!
Singapore?
http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__international_news/&articleid=342384&referrer=R
Ewen MacAskill | Washington, United States
21 June 2008 07:50
Barack Obama faced widespread condemnation on Friday from both right and left for reneging on a promise on election campaign financing.
The Democratic presidential candidate found himself in the unusual position of being attacked not only by his Republican rival, John McCain, but also by papers such as the New York Times and Washington Post, think tanks committed to election reform, and even his own supporters.
Obama promised last year that he would abide by the election funding scheme set up after the 1974 Watergate scandal, provided his Republican rival would too. The scheme provides each candidate with $85-million from the public purse to fight the election campaign from early September to November 4, on condition they accept no outside money.
McCain, less successful at fund-raising than Obama, agreed on Thursday to take public funding but Obama said he was not going to participate, the first presidential candidate ever to do so. Obama's campaign team said he made the decision because the existing system is open to abuse by the Republicans. But signing up for the $85-million deal would be to squander a big advantage he has in fund-raising.
Up to the end of April, Obama raised $265-million, spent mainly on his battle for the Democratic nomination with Hillary Clinton, compared with McCain's $115-million by the end of May. Obama is on course to raise at least another $265-million between now and the election.
Steve Schmidt, a senior adviser in the McCain campaign team, led the attack on Friday, saying that breaking the promise raised questions about trust. "As we scrutinise Obama's words, it is increasingly difficult ... to discern what Obama truly believes at his core," he said.
The Republican party on Friday distributed copies of editorials from papers, including the New York Times and the Washington Post. The Times said: "The excitement underpinning Obama's campaign rests considerably on his vows to depart from self-interested politics. Unfortunately, Mr Obama has come up short of that standard with this decision to reject public spending limitations and opt instead for unlimited private financing in the general election."
The Washington Post was also indignant: "He had an opportunity here to demonstrate that he really is a different kind of politician, willing to put principles and promises he has made above political calculations. He made a different choice."
Michael Malbin, director of the non-partisan Campaign Finance Institute, expressed disappointment and said the system would probably have worked well again this year. He thought the public funds should have been sufficient. "A million dollars a day doesn't look to me like chicken feed," he said.
Democratic Senator Russ Feingold, an Obama supporter, called Obama's reversal "not a good decision".
Obama aired his first general election ad on Friday across 18 states, in a demonstration of his spending power. In an article for USA Today, Obama wrote: "The decision wasn't an easy one ... but the public financing of presidential elections ... is broken -- and the Republican party has mastered the art of gaming this broken system."
His team argues that while McCain has agreed to the limit, there are groups with millions at their disposal who could back campaigns such as the Swift Boat one in 2004 that challenged the Vietnam record of the Democratic candidate, John Kerry. His team also says that the Republican party is cash-rich compared with the Democrats. Both parties can spend on campaigning separate from their candidates. -- guardian.co.uk © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2008