washingtonpost.com
Why I Gave
By George Soros
Friday, December 5, 2003; Page A31
I and a number of other wealthy Americans are contributing millions of
dollars to grass-roots organizations engaged in the 2004 presidential election.
We are deeply concerned with the direction in which the Bush administration is
taking the United States and the world.
If Americans reject the president's policies at the polls, we can write off the
Bush Doctrine as a temporary aberration and resume our rightful place in the
world. If we endorse those policies, we shall have to live with the hostility of
the world and endure a vicious cycle of escalating violence.
In this effort, I have committed $10 million to America Coming Together, a
grass-roots get-out-the-vote operation, and $2.5 million to the MoveOn.org Voter
Fund, a popular Internet advocacy group that is airing advertisements to
highlight the administration's misdeeds. This is a pittance in comparison with
money raised and spent by conservative groups.
Rather than a debate on the issues, there's been a lot of name-calling by such
groups as the Republican National Committee and the National Rifle Association.
In an attempt to taint the groups I support and intimidate other donors, they
imply that my contributions are illegitimate or that I have somehow broken the
law.
In fact, I have scrupulously abided by both the letter and the spirit of the
law. Both America Coming Together and the MoveOn.org Voter Fund are "527"
organizations -- referring to Section 527 of the tax code -- which are entitled
to receive unlimited contributions from individuals. Both groups are fully
transparent about their motives and activities. Both file detailed and frequent
reports with government regulators.
The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act was an attempt to limit the influence that
special interests can gain by financing candidates and to level the playing
field between the two parties. My contributions are made in that spirit.
President Bush has a huge fundraising advantage because he has figured out a
clever way to raise money. He relies on donors he calls "Pioneers," who collect
$100,000 apiece in campaign contributions in increments that fall within the
legal limit of $2,000 a person, and on those he calls "Rangers," who collect at
least $200,000.
Many of these Pioneers and Rangers are corporate officials who are well situated
to raise funds from their business associates, bundle them together and pass
them along with tracking numbers to ensure proper "credit." They are buying the
same level of access and influence for their corporate interests that they
previously obtained with their own and corporate funds. With the help of
Pioneers and Rangers, President Bush is on track to collect $200 million.
To counter the fundraising advantage obtained by this strategy, I have
contributed to independent organizations that by law are forbidden to coordinate
their activities with the political parties or candidates. That law minimizes or
eliminates the ability to purchase influence in exchange for my contribution.
Moreover, I don't seek such influence. My contributions are made in what I
believe to be the common interest. ACT is working to register voters, and MoveOn
is getting more people engaged in the national debate over Bush's policies.
I recognize that the system is imperfect, and I wish there were a different way
to level the playing field. Making contributions to ACT and the MoveOn.org Voter
Fund is the best approach I have found. I have been an advocate of campaign
finance reform for almost a decade, including the legal defense of the current
legislation. I recognize that every new regulation has unintended adverse
consequences, but this does not mean reform should be abandoned.
Clearly, the rules need to be updated in the light of the 2004 experience. Some
good proposals have already surfaced, including one from the major sponsors of
the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. This bill should be supported. Among other
measures, it calls for an increase in the federal match for small contributions
and would raise the spending limit for candidates who accept public funding to
$75 million -- changes that would reduce the bias toward big-money donors. Free
airtime for candidates is also important. This would reduce the cost of
campaigns and the distorting effect of commercials.
Full disclosure and transparency are clearly beneficial. It is important that
people know where financial support is coming from. I have been open about my
contributions, and I welcome the debate they have sparked. In the meantime, as
the debate continues, my contributions help to ensure that the money spent on
trying to reelect President Bush doesn't overwhelm the process.
The writer is chairman of the Soros Management Fund and author of "The Bubble
of American Supremacy."
Source: Washington Post
Soros's Deep Pockets vs. Bush
Financier Contributes $5 Million More in Effort to Oust President
By Laura Blumenfeld
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 11, 2003; Page A03
NEW YORK -- George Soros, one of the world's richest men, has given away nearly
$5 billion to promote democracy in the former Soviet bloc, Africa and Asia. Now
he has a new project: defeating President Bush.
"It is the central focus of my life," Soros said, his blue eyes settled on an
unseen target. The 2004 presidential race, he said in an interview, is "a matter
of life and death."
Soros, who has financed efforts to promote open societies in more than 50
countries around the world, is bringing the fight home, he said. On Monday, he
and a partner committed up to $5 million to MoveOn.org, a liberal activist
group, bringing to $15.5 million the total of his personal contributions to oust
Bush.
Overnight, Soros, 74, has become the major financial player of the left. He has
elicited cries of foul play from the right. And with a tight nod, he pledged:
"If necessary, I would give more money."
"America, under Bush, is a danger to the world," Soros said. Then he smiled:
"And I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is."
Soros believes that a "supremacist ideology" guides this White House. He hears
echoes in its rhetoric of his childhood in occupied Hungary. "When I hear Bush
say, 'You're either with us or against us,' it reminds me of the Germans." It
conjures up memories, he said, of Nazi slogans on the walls, Der Feind Hort mit
("The enemy is listening"). "My experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have
sensitized me," he said in a soft Hungarian accent.
Soros's contributions are filling a gap in Democratic Party finances that opened
after the restrictions in the 2002 McCain-Feingold law took effect. In the past,
political parties paid a large share of television and get-out-the-vote costs
with unregulated "soft money" contributions from corporations, unions and rich
individuals. The parties are now barred from accepting such money. But non-party
groups in both camps are stepping in, accepting soft money and taking over voter
mobilization.
"It's incredibly ironic that George Soros is trying to create a more open
society by using an unregulated, under-the-radar-screen, shadowy, soft-money
group to do it," Republican National Committee spokeswoman Christine Iverson
said. "George Soros has purchased the Democratic Party."
In past election cycles, Soros contributed relatively modest sums. In 2000, his
aide said, he gave $122,000, mostly to Democratic causes and candidates. But
recently, Soros has grown alarmed at the influence of neoconservatives, whom he
calls "a bunch of extremists guided by a crude form of social Darwinism."
Neoconservatives, Soros said, are exploiting the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11,
2001, to promote a preexisting agenda of preemptive war and world dominion.
"Bush feels that on September 11th he was anointed by God," Soros said. "He's
leading the U.S. and the world toward a vicious circle of escalating violence."
Soros said he had been waking at 3 a.m., his thoughts shaking him "like an alarm
clock." Sitting in his robe, he wrote his ideas down, longhand, on a stack of
pads. In January, PublicAffairs will publish them as a book, "The Bubble of
American Supremacy" (an excerpt appears in December's Atlantic Monthly). In it,
he argues for a collective approach to security, increased foreign aid and
"preventive action."
"It would be too immodest for a private person to set himself up against the
president," he said. "But it is, in fact" -- he chuckled -- "the Soros Doctorine."
His campaign began last summer with the help of Morton H. Halperin, a liberal
think tank veteran. Soros invited Democratic strategists to his house in
Southampton, Long Island, including Clinton chief of staff John D. Podesta,
Jeremy Rosner, Robert Boorstin and Carl Pope.
They discussed the coming election. Standing on the back deck, the evening sun
angling into their eyes, Soros took aside Steve Rosenthal, CEO of the liberal
activist group America Coming Together (ACT), and Ellen Malcolm, its president.
They were proposing to mobilize voters in 17 battleground states. Soros told
them he would give ACT $10 million.
Asked about his moment in the sun, Rosenthal deadpanned: "We were disappointed.
We thought a guy like George Soros could do more." Then he laughed. "No,
kidding! It was thrilling."
Malcolm: "It was like getting his Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval."
"They were ready to kiss me," Soros quipped.
Before coffee the next morning, his friend Peter Lewis, chairman of the
Progressive Corp., had pledged $10 million to ACT. Rob Glaser, founder and CEO
of RealNetworks, promised $2 million. Rob McKay, president of the McKay Family
Foundation, gave $1 million and benefactors Lewis and Dorothy Cullman committed
$500,000.
Soros also promised up to $3 million to Podesta's new think tank, the Center for
American Progress.
Soros will continue to recruit wealthy donors for his campaign. Having put a lot
of money into the war of ideas around the world, he has learned that "money buys
talent; you can advocate more effectively."
At his home in Westchester, N.Y., he raised $115,000 for Democratic presidential
candidate Howard Dean. He also supports Democratic presidential contenders Sen.
John F. Kerry (Mass.), retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark and Rep. Richard A. Gephardt
(Mo.).
In an effort to limit Soros's influence, the RNC sent a letter to Dean Monday,
asking him to request that ACT and similar organizations follow the
McCain-Feingold restrictions limiting individual contributions to $2,000.
The RNC is not the only group irked by Soros. Fred Wertheimer, president of
Democracy 21, which promotes changes in campaign finance , has benefited from
Soros's grants over the years. Soros has backed altering campaign finance, an
aide said, donating close to $18 million over the past seven years.
"There's some irony, given the supporting role he played in helping to end the
soft money system," Wertheimer said. "I'm sorry that Mr. Soros has decided to
put so much money into a political effort to defeat a candidate. We will be
watchdogging him closely."
An aide said Soros welcomes the scrutiny. Soros has become as rich as he has,
the aide said, because he has a preternatural instinct for a good deal.
Asked whether he would trade his $7 billion fortune to unseat Bush, Soros opened
his mouth. Then he closed it. The proposal hung in the air: Would he become poor
to beat Bush?
He said, "If someone guaranteed it."