Remember Jerry Maguire? Since it's never too early for some mid-'90s 
		nostalgia, I'll remind you of four little words: Show me the money! Keep 
		those four words on the tips of your tongues, because they may just save 
		blogs from Sens. John McCain and Russ Feingold. 
	Here's how. 
	
	Everyone knows by now that the campaign-finance lobby has got online 
		political speech in its crosshairs. Commissioner Brad Smith of the 
		Federal Election Commission performed the public service of alerting the 
		public to that fact earlier this month -- specifically, he alerted us to 
		the fact that the FEC has been forced by a court decision to write rules 
		for what online speech does and does not fall under the restrictions of 
		the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. 
	Since Smith made his comments, the "cleanies" have issued backtrack 
		after backtrack and denial after denial, all of which, in the end, have 
		boiled down to this: "Well, yes, but don't worry…You can trust us."
	
	Well, no, we can't. 
	So here's how concerned citizens should respond: Show us the money!
		
	The cleanies want to crack down on 527s? Show us the money! They want 
		to replace the FEC with a new regulatory body wielding even greater 
		power? Show us the money! They want to start down a slippery slope that 
		will end with links to campaign Web sites counting as donations to 
		campaigns? Show…us…the…money. 
	As I've shown in two recent columns -- one on TCS and the other in 
		The New York Post -- the last thing on earth the cleanies want to do is 
		show us the money: where it comes from, how much of it comes and the 
		motives behind it coming. 
	That's because campaign-finance reform is not a "movement" as its 
		proponents have claimed, it is a lobby -- funded and orchestrated by 
		eight very liberal foundations which fooled Congress and the American 
		people into believing that the front groups they set up were grassroots 
		organizations. 
	But I've only told half of the story. In fact, I am only able to tell 
		half of the story, because the other half will require the collective 
		intelligence of the blogosphere. 
	And that's where "Show Us the Money" comes in. 
	A huge chunk of money ($123 million) that finances the 
		campaign-finance-reform lobby comes from left-wing foundations -- I've 
		shown that in my articles, relying largely on an informative report put 
		out recently by Political Money Line. But a bunch more money comes from 
		corporations and wealthy individuals, and that money wasn't captured in 
		the Political Money Line report -- because the groups that lobby for 
		campaign-finance reform by and large don't disclose where they get their 
		money. 
	You read that right: The disclosure crowd is made up of hypocrites 
		who won't disclose where their own money comes from. 
	Now, as non-profits, they're not required to do this. But if they're 
		going to work to repeal the First Amendment on the premise that money 
		dictates motives, well, they better show us theirs. 
	For example, who are the donors to the Reform Institute, and what did 
		they want (and/or get) for their money? The Reform Institute, you might 
		remember, is the bogus think tank that serves as a shadow McCain 2008 
		office. It's supposedly a not-for-profit "education organization," but 
		mostly it just educates the public about how totally awesome John McCain 
		is. What's more, at least three high-ranking McCain 2000 staffers are 
		cooling their heels there until McCain 2008. 
	Richard Davis, the McCain 2000 campaign manager, takes home a 
		$110,000 a year "consulting fee" as the fake-tank's president. Trevor 
		Potter, general counsel to McCain 2000, is -- fittingly enough -- 
		general counsel to the Reform Institute. And Carla Eudy, national 
		finance director of McCain 2000, is -- you may have guessed it -- the 
		Institute's director of finance. 
	An Associated Press investigation earlier this month already found 
		that Cablevision gave the Institute $100,000 right after its CEO, 
		Charles Dolan, testified before McCain's Commerce Committee in 2003. 
		Another $100,000 check from Cablevision came into the Institute in 
		August of 2004, 12 days before McCain wrote to Dolan about a pending 
		pricing issue, urging him to "feel free to contact me and discuss these 
		issues further." 
	What other companies made donations to his think tank -- donations, 
		by the way, that would be illegal many times over under McCain-Feingold 
		because of their size if made to a political party or campaign? 
	Most importantly, when will the cleanies come clean? Show us the 
		money! 
	This week, I tried to get three major campaign-finance groups to 
		release lists of their donors. 
	Democracy 21 told me: "Democracy 21 complies with the rules that 
		apply to all nonprofit groups. In addition, although not required by law 
		and not done by most nonprofit groups, we have disclosed the foundation 
		grants we have received." In other words, they're not going to release 
		the names of the companies and individuals who have donated. 
	Common Cause released a list of donors over $25,000 -- though only 
		for the last four years. They refused to release the names of donors 
		below that threshold. 
	The Brennan Center for Justice didn't get back to me after repeated 
		phone calls. 
	That leaves: the Alliance for Better Campaigns, the Campaign Finance 
		Institute, the Campaign for America, the Campaign Legal Center, the 
		Campaign Reform Project, the Center for Governmental Studies, the Center 
		for Public Integrity, the Center for Responsive Politics, the Committee 
		for Economic Development, the National Voting Rights Institute and 
		Public Campaign. 
	Not one of these groups discloses all of its donors over $200 -- as 
		is required by law for pretty much any other political contribution. 
	Again, they don't have to. These groups are supposedly non-partisan, 
		and they supposedly don't lobby for or against specific legislation. But 
		recent revelations have made it clear that the more we know about the 
		money, the more we'll know about the motives. And the more we know about 
		the motives, the more that can be done to fight further restrictions on 
		political speech. 
	So, remember, when you hear about any new proposed restriction on 
		political speech: Show us the money! 
	Ryan Sager is a member of the editorial board of The New York Post. 
		He also edits the blog Miscellaneous Objections and can be reached at 
		editor@rhsager.com. 
	--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are a producer or reporter who is interested in receiving more 
		information about this article or the author, please email your request 
		to interview@techcentralstation.com.