Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 30, 1996)
liffv’s “Get Pierced By A Pro” *'*' ^ Over 4 Years Experience « ,|f% BODY PIERCING ONLY V*“ . CLEAN & STERILE - V Exotic PRIVATE Body Walk-Ins & Appointments Piercing 305 South 11th_ i $ Happy | '6 HAUO-Wwcf i I \j We warned our Buffalo! We told A A him that creepy, crawly, scary things <\ X lurked in the dark. But, Oh no! He X X knew it all! Just look at him now. V V But that won't stop us from offering A you a goulish delight! A li BUFFALO WILD WINGS & WECK FINANCE from page 1 are paying a bigger portion of the tab than individual donors. In the specific races: • U.S. Rep. Jon Christensen, The Republican candidate in Omaha’s 2nd Congressional District, took in almost ■ as much in PAC donations as all other Nebraska U.S. House incumbents and challengers combined. • Christensen’s individual dona tions of more than $200 amounted to almost $400,000 more than similar donations to all Nebraska U.S. House incumbents and challengers combined. • Agriculture, insurance and bank ing groups were the biggest PAC con tributors, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit cam paign finance watchdog group. In Nebraska, individuals are lim ited to donations of $1,000 each in the primary and general election. PACs are limited to $5,000 each in the primary and general election. Campaign finance reform is a re current issue in Congress and is the latest brush fire on the campaign trail. While many on Nebraska’s campaign trail say campaign finance reform is needed, Bereuter said he doubts re forms will pass. “I would like to think so, but I don’t,” he said of the possibility of re forms passing in the next Congress. Bereuter, who has voted in favor of both Democrat and Republican campaign-finance measures in the 104th Congress, said reforms are es pecially important in Nebraska be cause it it is a small state that PACs believe is buyable. The nine-term 1 st District represen tative said reform is desperately needed because it affects the action — or inaction — of Congress. “Both parties are trying to protect the system,” he said. And there is a reason for that, said Larry Makinson, a researcher with the nonprofit Center for Responsive Poli tics. He said the draw of Washington money is strong. “When you’re in, you’re in,” he said. In the case of Christensen, who has been at the top of list of the best fresh man fundraisers, Makinson said his position in Washington made him dif ficult to compete against. “The ability of someone on the in side in Washington to raise money is almost unmatchable/Mie said. “This is a big-money game,” Without that access to Washington, challengers can only dream about big money, Makinson said. But, Christensen’s campaign said that although he may have mere con tributions, his challenger, Omaha at torney James Martin Davis, has taken large amounts from outside Nebraska. Lori Wall, a Christensen spokes woman, said Davis had the benefit of attack ads bought by the AFL-CIO la bor union, the Sierra Club and a few other liberal-leaning groups. Wall said the AFL-CIO had spent as much as $700,000 in ads against Christensen. With that help, Wall said, the can didates’ spending power has evened out. The financing of Nebraska’s cam paigns has been and will be a campaign issue to the candidates. in tne notly contested Senate race between Hagel and Nelson, both can didates have been complaining about issues ads and their funding. Both candidates have been trying to out-spin each other on who is an “insider.” According to the data, Nelson is taking in far more PAC money than Hagel, and Hagel receives far more in dividual contributions exceeding $200. In all, individual donations of more than $200 outpace PACs by almost $1 million in the Senate race. Hagel has taken in about $240,000 more than Nelson in individual donations. Nelson, however, outpaces Hagel by more than $300,000 in PAC money. Makinson said Nelson’s PAC money lead was a result of PACs mak ing early bets on the race. “The handicappers were picking him early on,” he said. “PACs hate close races. They would rather have a safe bet.” Often in close races, PACs hedge their bets and give money to both can didates, a practice Makinson called “bald-faced opportunism.” Several PACs have made contribu tions to both the Nelson and Hagel campaigns. Hagel said Nelson’s PAC donations made the governor the “candidate of the special interests.” ~ “I am the candidate of the people,” -Hagel said after a rally in Lincoln Sat urday. _ Adam Branting, Nelson’s spokes man, said Nelson’s PAC successes were the result of his work in state government and Washington’s belief ‘ that Nelson would do well. He said Hagel’s lead in individual donations had nothing to do with what kind of candidate he was. “Jan Stoney did the same thing in 1994,” Branting said. “It has nothing to do with being a candidate of the people.” Nebraska has a finite number of donors, Branting said, and Nelson and Hagel both have tapped them out. With his lead in cash remaining, he said, the advantage was Nelson’s. “Unfortunately the cost of running a campaign is substantial,” he said. University of Nebraska-Lincoln political science Professor Robert Sittig said campaigns in Nebraska have gone from “ho-hum” financed races to the big time in the last decade. Sittig cited the Senate races as an example. Hagel may spend more than $3 million, Nelson almost $2 million. “That does kind of take your breath away for Nebraska,” Sittig said. But Hagel has had a tougher po litical road, Sittig said. Hagel started with little name recognition and a pri mary against a well known politician. “You have to take into account that ay ear ago, he was a virtual unknown,” Sittig said. Hagel has had to spend his own money, on top of donations, to try to defeat a popular governor, Sittig said. According to FEC reports from Oct. 16, Hagel spent $838,363 of his own money, while Nelson has spent none of his own money. The financing of federal races could be trouble-free if every regis tered voter in Nebraska gave $5, $10 or $15 to help finance races. That way, Sittig said, politicians wouldn’t have to rely on PACs for funding. But when it comes to reforming the financing of campaigns, Republicans and Democrats are at odds. And un less they come to an agreement, he said, no reforms will be coining soon. “We’re faced with what we’ve got, and what we’ve got is a herky-jerky system that is turning on us.” Soft money an issue in state elections By Matthew Waite Special Projects Reporter Soft money and independent ex penditures are bad words on the cam paign trail. While there is no measure of how much independent expenditure money is coming into Nebraska, more than $700,000 in soft money is leaving the state. Soft money is money donated to political parties, not to candidates. In dependent expenditures are funds spent for or against a candidate with out the candidate officially being in volved. Both are legal, and both are big is sues this election. Just ask Jon Christensen. The 2nd District Republican U.S. representative has been the target of an independent expenditure campaign by die AFL-CK) labor union and other liberal-leaning groups. The Christensen campaign claims the labor union alone has spent more than $700,000 in advertising against Christensen, who is running against Omaha attorney James Martin Davis. The advertisements against Christensen, in political parlance, are called “issues advertising,” a type of independent expenditure. They often blast one candidate, while not specifi cally supporting the other. These ads have become sore sub jects on the trail. Each time an issues advertisement airs, die targeted candi Source: FECInfo date cries foul. But under campaign fi nance law, they are legal. Another parial£dn the trail is soft money. * Rfrpttfr^iran wyyrimriji) rjmHirfatP Bob Dole reCentlytalled for the elimi nation of soft money as part of his plan for campaign finance reform. Dole’s plan came after a flap over the Demo cratic Patty legally accepting targe contributions from foreign investors. According to FECInfo, a nonprofit World Wide %eb site maintained by a former Federal Election Commission officer, Nebraska soft money dona tions fell along expected patterns. More money went to Republicans; Agriculture groups and major compa nies topped a list of contributors. The big donors were ConAgra, which put in almost a $250,000; Mu tual of Omaha, which donated $73,500; and Terrance Watanabe, owner of the Oriental Trading Com pany from Omaha, who donated $70,000. Seventy-eight percent, or more Aaron Steckelberg/DN than $550,000, of all soft money in Nebraska went to the Republican * Party. The remaining 22 percent, $150,000, wait to die Democrats. Jennifer Keen, a research associ ate with the Center for Responsive Politics in Washington, D.C., said soft money donations are used to buy in fluence and access to parties and can didates. The biggest soft-money contribu tors come from places such as Wash ington, New Yak and California. The top four soft-money donors indude two tobacco companies, a liquor com pany and an oil company. The FEC recently reported die Re publican Party took in $87 million in soft money compared tb $84 million for the Democrats. Keen said soft money isn’t going away any time soon. “We’d like to see it go away,” she said. “There’s been so much talk about campaign finance reform ova the last two elections and nothing has been done about it” i