Money talks. In Washington however money shouts from the rooftops. The recent collapse of Enron has, in addition to embarrassing the Republican White House, brought campaign finance reform back to the public eye.

Every election we hear reports of the incredible amounts of money each candidate spends on getting elected. For instance, the price of the 1992 congressional and presidential elections was $1.8 billion (no, your eyes are not lying- it says billion), but the price almost doubled by 2000, where the total spending jumped to $3 billion. At this rate, the 2004 elections will cost even more unless significant reforms are undertaken.

These large amounts of money are coming from somewhere, and it is usually not from regular Joe Q. Anybody. Rather it is the corporations, special interest groups and rich individuals who donate large amounts of money and usually receive special privileges in return. Although after the Watergate scandal limits were set on direct contributions, there is no limit for soft money contributions, money that goes towards “party building” activities. Enron, for example, donated almost $6 million in campaign contributions, most of which was soft money.

Obviously if companies like Enron are donating large amounts of money, they expect to receive something in return, which they usually do. In 2001, when the Energy policy was being drafted, Enron executives had six meetings with Vice President Dick Cheney. The resulting policies were very favorable to Enron.

Some of the largest beneficiaries of Enron’s largess-Larry Combest (R-TX), Charles Stenholm (R-TX) and Phil Gramm (R-TX)- all played major roles in creating the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000. In this Enron-supported bill, the main business of Enron, energy derivative trading was exempted from government regulation.

These are just a few examples of the benefits Enron reaped from their sowing of money in the pockets of politicians. Although these examples cited Republicans, the Democrats are not innocent either. Many of them also received money from Enron in addition to the various interest groups the Democrats are beholden to.

The current system is a form of legalized bribery that must change. The sea of cash floating around the politicians is drowning out the voice of the average American. After all, if this happened at Saint Louis University, we would not stand for it. Imagine if in the upcoming SGA elections, the Underwater Basket Weaving Club donated $200 to each of the candidates running for Financial VP. Then, when the allocations for the student groups were announced, the Underwater Basket Weaving club received $4000 ($3999 more than it received the year before). This would obviously upset every other student group (as well as cause a big stink at Senate) and would hopefully lead to immediate reform in SGA campaign financing.

So what is our federal government waiting for? The current system, with unlimited soft money contributions, is merely a convoluted form of legalized bribery. Although the Senate has passed the McCain-Feingold bill (which bans soft money contributions as well as making other reforms), the companion bill in the House, the Shays-Meehan bill has yet to be considered. However, due to the diligent work of various citizen advocacy groups, a House discharge petition which forces consideration of a bill, received the 218 signatures needed on January 24th.

Even if the Shays-Meehan bill passes in the House, further campaign finance reform will be needed. The skyrocketing costs of running a political campaign leave people without deep pockets out of consideration. Currently, the only viable way to run a campaign is to solicit money from various groups such as businesses and lobbyists. Reforms such as free TV advertising for candidates would lower costs and should be considered. Several states already have passed public-financing laws for state elections, which is a step in the right direction. Now it is up to our federal government to do the same.

With the passage of these reforms, hopefully Mr. Ben Franklin will finally stop talking long enough for regular Americans to get their say in.

Lubna Alam is a junior studying history.