Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, June 17, 1990 TAG: 9006190368
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: C2 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
What's he planning to do with all of that money now that Democrats have failed to find a candidate?
Warner plans to hit the campaign trail anyway, but he'll spend more of his time listening than talking, he says. Sounds a tad dull, but how can you have a lively debate when half the dialogue is missing?
Silence from the opposing camp is better than mudslinging, but challenge keeps incumbents on their toes. The voters have been gypped.
Warner, who is seeking his third six-year term, is a popular and hard-working senator, but resting on his laurels is no way to spend a campaign.
If any money is left, Warner says he'll save it for future campaigns, or for travel in Virginia on Senate-related business. He can't keep the money.
Not that he needs it. According to financial disclosure statements, Warner earns more than $493,000 a year and has more than $3 million in assets. He could give his excess campaign funds to charity or to other candidates, but Warner feels that would be violating the trust of contributors.
Warner's hefty war chest and lack of opposition are not unrelated. Both illustrate the need for federal campaign finance reform. Warner is one of the first to admit it. The average Senate campaign costs about $4 million, and raising it eats up time needed to perform Senate duties.
"They're not pennies from heaven," says Warner, who amassed his campaign fund over the past two years. It wasn't easy. More than 7,000 Virginians handed over contributions as Warner made his way through the state. The tedious process of fund-raising would have been even more difficult for those who considered challenging him.
Anyone who hopes to beat a Senate incumbent needs, it is said, more than $4 million - a sum nearly impossible to raise unless you are an incumbent. The best people aren't running for office because of that catch-22.
When the last elections were over, winning incumbents typically had more cash on hand than their challengers spent throughout the campaign.
Something should be done to lower the cost of running for office, Warner says, but he has no specifics in mind. That's part of the problem. There's been a lot of conscientious debate in Congress about campaign finance reform, but there's been no action.
No wonder. The incumbents who benefit so much from the system are in no hurry to diminish their advantages. It's not Warner's fault, but the system's, that no one could afford to take him on.
He can't change the system singlehandedly. But until Congress reforms federal campaign-finance laws, voters will have to endure a growing number of campaigns like the one Warner is about to enjoy.
by CNB