I know that I am largely repeating things I have said before, but I can’t resist–plus, I pay for the bandwidth…

But as I watch this game of “he’s connected to him!” and “he once had lunch with her!” and especially “Republican donors gave money for anti-Kerry ads” and so forth, it simply underscores to me the absurdity of the entire campaign finance “system” that we have devised for ourselves.

First, all of this nonsense about “coordination” (or the lack thereof) or the idea that a car dealership can’t advertise thirty days prior to the election because it bears the name of a candidate or the fact that certain groups can’t say “vote for Kerry” but can imply it, is really all the height of ridiculousness.

All of these silly games are not the result of the fact that we need to tweak the rules-the game is the result of the attempt to regulate freedom of speech. Any such attempts are going to result in convoluted behavior as groups and individuals seek to find a way to get their message out. And yes, some of those messages will be false, ugly and very negative. To which I say: so what? It is an unavoidable element of true freedom of speech, and therefore an acceptable outcome of one of the foundational rights in a democracy.

Second, it should be no surprise that persons who voted Democratic in the past are contributing to anti-Bush 527s and that Republicans are contributing to anti-Kerry 527s. Indeed, not only should it not be a surprise, it should be assumed from the get go.

Third, it shouldn’t be a surprise that people associated in the past with Bush or Republican politics are working with anti-Kerry 527s nor should it be a surprise that former Clinton administration officials are working for Michael Moore, or that persons previously active in the Democratic Party are working for MoveOn.org and other anti-Bush 527s. Again, should it not be assumed, prima facie, that this will be the case?

Fourth, it should disturb us all that high elected officials, including the President of the United States and members of the Senate are calling for more laws and rules that would have the effect of curtailing political speech and making this already nonsensical mess even messier.

Fifth, the solution to this is all clear: let citizens contribute to whom they please, allow coordination amongst interested parties, and simply require full disclosure. Don’t let politicians hide behind the fact that they aren’t allowed to coordinate, and don’t let independent groups pretend to be non-partisan when they clearly are (getting partisan isn’t a bad thing, by the way–indeed, we are all partisans in one way or another).

Sixth, all of these rules spring from the proposition that if we did what I just suggested that the people of the US will be too stupid to know who is paying for what and therefore will be too easily manipulated by the ever-evil “monied interests”. While I do not deny that citizens are often swayed by advertisements that they ought to ignore, but I far trust the collective capacity of the American voter to filter this information than I do the ability of laws to make sure that the “right” people give money to the “proper” groups in the “sanctioned” amounts to somehow filter out the “bad” speech and the “untrustworthy” groups.