I’m a fan of Rudy Giuliani. He’s not my first choice for the 2008 nomination, that’s Newt Gingrich hands down, but he’s near the top of the list. I know that he would be a strong leader in the war against global jihad, which is the single most important issue in my opinion. But there are still some issues where I’m concerned about Rudy and I’m waiting to here more details on his positions. One such issue is campaign finance.

Recently, on the Dennis Prager radio show, Rudy gave what I thought was a very weak answer when asked his position on McCain-Feingold. Here’s the relevant section:

DP: My listeners know this, that this is actually rendered [McCain], unfortunately, unvotable for me. And if I have him on, I will tell him that, and that is campaign finance reform, which has ensured that essentially, only multi-millionaires run for office in the United States of America, especially to the Senate, because I cannot…if I, Dennis Prager, who doesn’t have any money, wanted to run, no millionaire could give me a million dollars. They could only give me $4,000 dollars. So you have any views on campaign finance reform?

RG: I think there’s no question that the present McCain-Feingold law has had tremendous loopholes in it, that people have taken advantage of. And it needs to be corrected. It needs to be cured.

At this point red flags are going up. Loopholes? That sounds a lot like the recent spat over 527’s, which formed as a counter to the law’s assault on free speech and wouldn’t need to exist at all if people were free to spend their money how they please.

DP: So you would like to see it in place as well? You’re also for…

RG: I would like to…but I think, in fairness to Senator McCain, that he has recognized some of the problems that maybe weren’t foreseen in McCain-Feingold, and has promised to try to fix it. I don’t know that that’s happened.

DP: Well, let me then be specific. Why shouldn’t people just be allowed to give any amount of money they want to any candidate, and just have it publicly known? Why should there be a law limiting that freedom?

RG: Well, I mean, there…I think there are very good arguments on either side of that. I’ve always lived under a campaign finance law that had limitations on it, so I’m sort of pretty comfortable with it. But the reality is that the Supreme Court has so far ruled on that, and I guess found McCain-Feingold…

DP: Unfortunately.

RG: …found it Constitutional, although that was a pretty close vote.

DP: All right. We need to spend some time alone together.

RG: But I mean, I grew up in a system in New York where we had campaign finance, and we had matching funds, so I got pretty used to it. But it’s the law, unfortunately, the campaign finance law has become so complex and so difficult.

Rudy’s position is that, basically, he’s always had to deal with campaign finance laws so the thought of not having those kind of restrictions on free expression is beyond him. This certainly does not encourage one to believe Rudy is a deeply principled thinker. However, his strong fiscal record, support for school choice and firm stance on the war make him a net positive candidate in this bloggers opinion. And hopefully he’ll be influenced by the right policy people.

 Print This Post