CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM: Then and Now Money has always been the mother's milk of politics, and the desire to make sure that money does not spoil politics has existed for almost as long. American democracy has wrestled with how to make sure that no one group of people could use their resources to have undue influence on government. This question became particularly relevant after the abuses of the Watergate affair came to light in the early 1970's, and prompted the first serious reform of the campaign finance system. After World War II with the rise of television and the increasing tendency of campaigns to be candidate-centered, the cost of running for office increased dramatically. In the 1956 elections, total campaign spending was approximately $155 million with $9.8 million spent on radio and TV ads; in 1968, the total was $300 million, with advertising spending jumping to $58.9 million -- a six-fold increase. When John Gardner formed Common Cause in 1970, it was clear that more money was flowing into the political system, threatening to crowd out the voices of those without deep pockets. It was a time of deep mistrust of large institutions -- from universities to big business to government -- and the reliance on fund-raising only served to fuel those feelings. Common Cause joined with other reformers to push for campaign finance legislation. In 1971 Congress passed important legislation that began to provide public financing for presidential elections and tightened reporting requirements for contributions. Reformers received a boost when in the wake of the Watergate scandal it became clear that the Nixon campaign received huge amounts of money from wealthy individuals, took illegal corporate contributions, and even had undisclosed slush funds. In 1974, the Congress passed the most sweeping reform of the campaign finance system until that time. The legislation established stringent disclosure procedures of donors, set limits on how much an individual and political action committee could donate and how much a campaign could spend; and created a system to publicly finance presidential campaigns. In addition, the bill established the Federal Election Commission to enforce these laws. In 1976, the Supreme Court, in Buckley v. Valeo, ruled that the spending limits for House and Senate candidates and the contribution limit for independent expenditures were unconstitutional. With these changes, this bill set the rules that governed how elections were run in the United States. Despite this effort, campaigns continued to get more expensive, and candidates continued to spend more and more time raising money. Moreover, the FEC allowed the parties to accept large amounts of unregulated money to cover party expenses and party building, and later, to even help candidates. This "soft money" became a large loophole that was exploited in the 1990's, and the improprieties that came to light after the 1996 election, fueled efforts to reform the campaign finance system once again. Senators John McCain of Arizona and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin proposed a comprehensive bill whose central plank is a ban on soft money. Once again, central in this debate is Common Cause, putting John Gardner's legacy into action.