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
