Two Faces Of Sleaze

In his latest Against the Grain commentary, CBSNews.com's Dick Meyer takes a look at what really needs to be reformed in Washington.

Bill Clinton has usefully (and repeatedly) illuminated new frontiers of microsleazonics. George W. Bush has usefully (and repeatedly) illuminated new frontiers of macrosleazonics. Both display classic symptoms of being serial sleazes.

First, the microsleaze, just because it's easier and more obvious: What could more succinctly make the case for cleaning out the stables than the Marc Rich pardon? Such a political suicidal stunt by the supreme political animal of our times is only explicable in a context where unlimited personal and corporate funds can flow into a president's party and campaigns; and into an ex-president's legal defense fund, library endowment and who knows what else. It was a classless act that incited public indignation in a way the leasing of the Lincoln Bedroom never did.

Putting an exclamation point on the story was the news that broke just as the Senate began its debate, namely that James Riady, the Indonesian mogul and Clinton crony, had agreed to pay record-shattering fines of $8.6 million for violating campaign laws. Riady pled guilty to illegally funneling foreign contributions into Democratic coffers during the 1992 and 1996 campaigns. Turns out those "conspiracy theories" about foreign money in American campaigns were true after all.

So that's the gist of microsleaze – payoffs for pardons and favors, and access for specific individuals and companies.

The flip side, macrosleaze, grabbed the headlines last week. The Senate, to the glee of the credit-card industry, passed a bill that would make it harder for people to declare bankruptcy. Clinton had vetoed similar legislation; Bush will sign it. Bush also took back a campaign promise to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, considered a major source of global warming. Chalk up two clean kills for Macro Business.

The bankruptcy bill passed the Senate overwhelmingly, though (self-proclaimed) consumer groups fought it hard – but not hard enough. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, a campaign finance watchdog outfit, one credit-card company alone, MBNA America Bank, gave away $3.5 million in the 2000 elections, becoming Bush's largest single corporate contributor.

Overall, credit card and finance companies spent over $9 million in soft money, PAC and individual contributions in the 2000 lection, two-thirds of it to Republicans. Commercial banks spent another $29 million, and something called the National Consumer Bankruptcy Coalition contributed more than $5 million, mostly to Republicans.

Environmentalists were pleasantly surprised that Bush ever promised to cut back carbon dioxide emissions, but they were also surprised at how fast he caved in to a full-bore industry pressure campaign. They shouldn't have been. The coal mining industry alone gave away $3.8 million in the 2000 election, $3.4 million to Republicans. Electric utilities, meanwhile, spent $12.4 million in the last election.

It is entirely possible that these actions on personal bankruptcy and the environment are justifiable on the merits. It is not possible, however, that the merits could be fairly aired and weighed – and in a way that also appears fair – in the face such lopsided financial influence.

That is macrosleaze.

It would be wrong to assume that Republicans are more prone to macrosleaze and Democrats to microsleaze. These are opportunistic parasites.

It would also be wrong to think political sleaze is a problem that society can solve by legislative fiat or any other means. In the past, the attempted solutions of reformers have had unintended consequences that arguably made things worse.

That does not mean that the effort shouldn't be made. Every parent of a two-year-old knows that they can't stop mischief and bad behavior – but that doesn't mean they don't try.

(c) MMI Viacom Internet Services Inc. All Rights Reserved