Kenneth Vogel, over at the Politico [1], reports yesterday that the Federal election commission finally coughed up a ruling with regards to overspending by John Kerry’s campaign:
The Federal Election Commission voted unanimously Thursday to fine John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign more than $1.3 million for overspending.
But Kerry’s lawyer immediately pledged to appeal the decision, which will likely lead to an administrative hearing since the commissioners indicated a willingness to reconsider at least part of their decision. And that could set the stage for a potentially partisan battle before the panel over a relatively technical point – how labor costs are assessed.
“We will save for a later day the resolution of the labor cost issue,” commissioner Ellen Weintraub said after the 5-0 vote.
The issue, with regards to the overspending was effect on the 2000 for lecturing, is obviously moot. To my mind, this raises serious questions about the effectiveness of any FEC regulation, and the enforcement thereof. One way or the other, the election in question is years gone by the time these idiots finally come up with anything. Indeed, the only effect that this is going to have (aside from giving the opponents of John Edwards another minor campaign talking point ) is to create more unenforceable and possibly counter-productive law.
Update: Joyner notes the same Politico article, and agrees: [2]
For the sake of argument, let’s assume the FEC is right here. Let’s further posit a scenario where Kerry had received a few thousand more votes in Ohio and been elected president by a slim margin in the Electoral College. Would the election results therefore be overturned? Of course not. In that case, a $1.3 million fine would be a perfectly acceptable cost for gaining the slight advantage needed to win the presidency.
What, then, is the point?
The election in question was decided two and a half years ago. We’re well into the next presidential campaign cycle. If the FEC can not investigate and punish in real time, we might as well scrap it.
It occurs to me that this whole scenario would seem to lend argument to those opposed to McCain /Feingold, as a whole.