The Campaign Legal Center puts up this fun little item to try to knock down the Political Money Line report I’ve mentioned in some of my articles:

Financing Reform: A Reality Check: Thoughts from Mark Glaze, Director of Public Affairs

A few editorialists have recently noted a study showing that private foundations spent $123 million over 10 years to support efforts to reform the nation’s campaign finance laws. (1)

By any standard - except perhaps Washington’s - $12.3 million a year is indeed lot of money. But, as it turns out, it’s a relative drop in the bucket compared to the money others were spending to lobby Congress, to get elected or to oppose reform.

With apologies to the Harper’s Index, here is a Washington reality check:

Amount spent by corporations to lobby the U.S. Congress from 1998-2004: over $8 billion (2)

Amount spent by candidates, parties and outside groups on Election 2004 alone: nearly $4 billion (3)

Amount of soft money raised by the national parties from 1992 - 2002: nearly $1.7 billion (4)

Amount spent by 527 groups, in apparent violation of campaign finance law, in Election 2004: $482 million (5)

Amount the Federal Election Commission spent enforcing (or not) the campaign finance laws from 1996-2005: $342.5 million (6)

Amount received by the National Rifle Association, which filed suit to have the McCain/Feingold law thrown out, from 2000-2002: (two years only) $544.1 million (7)

Amount received by the Heritage Foundation, a campaign finance reform opponent, from 1998 - 2003 (five years only): $234.6 million (8)

Amount received by the CATO Institute, another campaign finance reform opponent, from 1997 -2003 (six years only): $100.4 million (9)

Number of $100,000+ soft money checks written by corporations, unions, foundations, wealthy donors and special interest groups to the political parties to win legislative favors: after passage of McCain/Feingold, 0.

So, does that last item mean all these “good government” groups will pack it up and never be heard from again?