Let the campaigns begin

STEVE SMITH

The top story continues to be the not-yet race for not-yet former

Congressman Chris Cox’s seat. Cox, as you may recall, has been

nominated to head the Securities and Exchange Commission, which has

to exchange commissioners when Cox is approved.

Yes, that’s when he is approved, not if. Apparently, a few other

folks around town also know that Cox’s approval is a foregone

conclusion.

At this early stage of the game, I’d put my money on state Sen.

John Campbell, even if state Sen. Dick Ackerman had not dropped out

of the race.

Campbell is the closest candidate we have who understands that it

is possible to continue to grow and prosper while remaining

environmentally friendly, or even improving the environment. Campbell

also knows that we are underutilizing our available technology and

that technology can help bridge the gap between growth and

environment.

“One of the things we can do is keep technology [in California] as

the world capital,” Campbell told me in a 2000 interview. “That’s

where balance comes in. Technology has high-paying jobs, the industry

is clean, and it can be decentralized; it doesn’t all have to be in a

downtown area so it can help change commuting patterns. This is a

perfect industry for the state. We can set the world standard for

policy for this industry, and we’re on the road to not doing it.”

And of the increasing influence of big money, he said: “First, I’m

still in control of myself. When you are an elected official, you are

responsible, clearly, to the voters who elected you, but no one can

or does put words in my mouth. So, I can vote the way I want to vote

and speak about the things I want to speak about.”

So far, Campbell has been true to his word, speaking out and

speaking up through a variety of outlets, including a blog he

recently began.

But there is a greater concern these days, one that transcends the

issues of an El Toro airport, illegal immigration or taxes. The

concern today is that the politicians in Washington cannot get

anything done and that when they do, it is usually driven by an

attempt to appease big money campaign donors and other money

interests.

One look at the recent massive reduction in the tobacco penalty

should tell us all we need to know.

Last week, Justice Department lawyers announced that they wanted

the tobacco industry to pay $10 billion over five years for a

national smoking-cessation program -- far less than the $130-billion,

25-year effort that had been estimated by an expert to be necessary.

After the announcement, six senators and two House members demanded

an investigation.

It matters not whether you agree with the penalty or the program

-- that’s not the issue. The issue is that the program got whittled

down to nothing through a sly attempt to circumvent a normal process.

The big money influence in Washington is just short of corruption.

It is the reason why we have not moved forward on global warming, why

we have no sensible energy plan and why we are not able to buy less

medications from less expensive sources.

Influence peddling in Washington is nothing new; it has been going

on nearly as long as our country has been alive. But today, the

problems we are ignoring are far more serious, and our delays in

resolving them have far greater consequences.

Over the years, California has been one of the nation’s pioneers,

leading the way many times in fashion, technology and cuisine. Now, I

have a challenge to all those who run for Cox’s seat: to be a pioneer

in another area.

I wrote a few days ago about former California Gov. Jerry Brown,

who ran for president in 1992 while accepting campaign contributions

of only $100 or less. As a result, Brown defeated Bill Clinton in

Maine, Colorado, Vermont, Connecticut, Utah and Nevada and was the

only candidate other than Clinton to receive enough voter support to

continue until the Democratic National Convention.

Today, I am asking each candidate who runs for Cox’s seat to sign

a pledge to do the same, to accept no donation larger than $135

during this campaign. (Adjusted for inflation, $135 is the 2005

equivalent of $100 in 1992.)

Please don’t tell me, that in this day and age, a campaign for

Congress cannot be run on donations of $135 or less. If anything, it

is more feasible today than it was in 1992 when Jerry Brown did it

successfully.

Today, we have the World Wide Web, which is now firmly a part of

America’s communi- cations process. We are a Web nation, and

communicating with voters via this technology is far faster and far

cheaper than conventional means.

I don’t have any romantic notions that pledging to limit one’s

campaign donations is going to reverse global warming or establish an

exit strategy for our presence in Iraq.

But such a pledge will attract national attention to another

California pioneering concept and send a message to others that we’re

fed up with the inaction and poor decisions resulting from the

influence of large donors.

Oh, and here’s a tip to anyone who is running: Be the first one to

sign the pledge. That way, you’ll make your opponents look like they

have been bought, and you can harp on this during the entire

campaign.

* STEVE SMITH is a Costa Mesa resident and a freelance writer.

Readers may leave a message for him on the Daily Pilot hotline at

(714) 966-4664 or send story ideas to dailypilot@latmes.com.