Horserace
November 16, 2007 3:37 PM

Mitt Romney, Push Polls, And McCain-Feingold

Earlier today, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney responded to reports that "push polls" – phone calls that first seem like legitimate polls but are intended to raise questions about a candidate – had been used to draw attention to his Mormon faith, among other issues.

“I think the attempts to attack me on the basis of my faith are un-American,” Romney said. He went on to suggest that it was legislation tied to one of his rivals, John McCain, that was partly responsible for what took place.

“I’m very disappointed in the political process that someone is pursuing to use this kind of underhanded, un-American technique to try and influence a political campaign and I anticipate there will be those that ask how in the world can this happen, how is it we don’t know who’s doing it?" Romney said. "And in that regard, you have to look back at the legislation that’s known as McCain-Feingold.”

When asked about McCain launching an investigation into the push polling, Romney said “it’s kind of ironic that Senator McCain is filing that request for an investigation."

He added: "Senator McCain is the father of McCain-Feingold and it’s McCain-Feingold that opens the pathway for this very kind of political technique. McCain-Feingold is the monster that we’re having to deal with here.”

The McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform legislation, which passed in 2002, was designed to stem the flow of unfettered soft-money donations to parties and keep issue ads from corporations and unions from airing close to an election. In the five years since, it has become a target of conservatives, who complain that it hampers free speech.

But is Romney's tying of the push poll controversy to McCain-Feingold fair? For an answer, we turned to Anthony Corrado, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute and an expert on campaign finance, who is a proponant of McCain-Feingold.

"It's not a fair characterization at all," Corrado said. "Push polling was taking place before McCain-Feingold. It was a problem in the 2000 Republican primaries, and was used in elections prior to 2000." He said it is "not a new technique, and certainly is not a technique something one can link to McCain-Feingold."

Romney makes a connection between the campaign finance reform measure and the anonymity of such attacks. But Corrado says the question of who pays for push polls has to do with disclosure legislation passed in 2000 – before McCain-Feingold – which came in response to issue ads aired by outside groups such as ``Republicans for Clean Air." There are many advocates for broader disclosure when it comes to push polls, he said, but the issue is not a function of campaign finance law.

Corrado did allow for one area where you might be able to tie push polls to McCain-Feingold. Under the legislation, restrictions mandate that if outside groups known as 527s were doing broadcast advertising within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary, and the ads featured a candidate, they couldn't use corporate or union money. But no similar restrictions were put on ground advertising such as direct mail -- and push polling. Since we aren't within 30 days of the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, however, this provision doesn't come into play. And, of course, since we don't know who was responsible for the push poll, we don't know whether a 527 is to blame.
Tags:
Mitt Romney ,
John McCain ,
McCain-Feingold
Topics:
Mitt Romney
Add a Comment
by timoteotk November 19, 2007 4:42 PM EST
I never thought I would agree with the son of the anti-Christ, Bill Maher, but on this one we are on the same page- Just because Article 6 says "there shall be no religious test" doesn''t mean I as a VOTER can''t employ my biases and judgemnt regarding voting for them in reference to how they think- Maher would say if you believe in "Judgement Day", then I don''t think you have the judgement to be in office. I would say if you do that means you know that one day you will be accountable for how you treat people both are valid depending on perspective. Equally valid is to not vote for someone when real science as in DNA refutes your religion(not evolution which is a pseudo-science) see "DNA and the Book of mormon- EXCELLENT- This is NOT BEING BIGOTED that is SO BOGUS. The Government should not have a test for office but voters CAN have any test they want!!and is a valid reason also see article on why Mike Huckabee is the BEST Choice to beat Hillary-Newsweek article: The GOP''s Best Bet? November 15, online.
If Dennis Kucinich said he worhipped a klingon space god that should & would cause me to take pause before I pull the lever for him NOTHING UNAMERICAN About This!!!!! McCAin tried this same BS in SC back in 2000 trying to make bush look bad because he went to speak at an Anit-catholic college.. Was not our opposition to inquisitorial cathlolicism the reason our forgathers came here????
I Like Mike- Jonathan Alter''s article in Newsweek on Nov. 15th calls him the GOP''s best bet.
Reply to this comment
by rlpawlin November 17, 2007 4:30 AM EST
People have every right to take into account any choice a politician makes and that includes their religion. You are born a certain ethnicity, gender, and pre-programmed with a specific sexuality. The same cannot be said for religion. Religion is a choice and thus, fair game when used as criteria to evaluate a candidate.

I will agree that not everyone using Romney''s religion as a measuring stick is well informed about the Mormon faith but that can be said about almost anyone when referring to a religion that is not their own. Informing people about the tenants of Mormonism is something Romney''s campaign should be addressing. What speaks volumes about Romney is the fact that instead of speaking openly about his religion he addresses it only when directly questioned which reeks of political calculation.

The bottom line is using one''s choice of religion to evaluate a person is no different than using one''s choice to drive a hybrid, cheat on their spouse, or root for the Yankees. All of these decisions shed light on a person''s character, values, and overall personal makeup.
Reply to this comment
by scottfromaz November 16, 2007 8:50 PM EST
You find me another candidate that has done more positive things with his life than Mitt Romney.

Career politcans are all talk, HAVE never gotten a *** thing done. Not in 20 years have we had a leader like Romney. Not since Reagan, it''s time to rally around the best candidate.

To put away our bigotry with LDS people, who are by and large very good clean people and rally for the smartest guy in the room.

Mitt Romney
Reply to this comment
by scottfromaz November 16, 2007 8:46 PM EST
Whoever did it, doesn''t have any class.

Mitt Romney the best candidate on either side and will help bring change to DC.

What candidate plans on NOT taking a 500,000 salary as President ?

What candidate will bring in outside consultants and do a top to bottom audit of the federal government ?

Only one, Mitt Romney. It''s time for change for the federal government. Mitt Romney will be that catalyst.

Go Romney !
Reply to this comment

60 Minutes

The secrets of tennis legend Andre Agassi; the growing threat of cyber wars; and more.
Read More

About Horserace

Description for Horserace

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn