Faith + Reason = Truth

     John McCain is sticking with publicly financed campaign funds, reportedly in the vicinity of $85 million available to him for the general election campaign this summer and fall.  He's locked into this scenario whether he wants to be or not, so it is not known what his course of action would have been if the choice were presented to him.
     Barack Obama has both options available to him and has changed his mind from using public funds (capped at $85 million) to using private donations (which will be unlimited in total).  It is being reported that he will raise 3-4 times McCain's publicly financed war chest, which calculates to $255 - 340 million.
     Coincidentally, McCain announced this week that he would have a government-sponsored prize of $300 million awarded to people or companies making quantum technological leaps in the field of batteries for autos.  My first thought:  McCain takes $300M and uses it to stimulate a shift away from oil-based transportation.  Obama takes that same $300M and spends it on t.v. commercials to get himself elected.  My logic is flawed though.
     McCain's battery money is government money, whereas Obama's funds are donated by people directly to him.  Therefore, he can use them however he deems fit, provided they are used to get him elected.  In other words, he cannot use them to fund battery development - or can he?
     What if a candidate were to take his election campaign donations and use them to conditionally fund a program, with the condition being that he or she is elected to the office they seek?  Taking that one step further, what if private donors are tapped (the kinds of donors who are only "allowed" to donate a few thousand dollars to a specific candidate or party, even though they would donate far greater sums if the election laws allowed them to do so) explicitly for the purpose of conditionally funding programs to be enacted only on condition of their candidate winning the race?  Could the oil companies, hedge fund managers, and other deep-pocketed yet limited contributors be exploited for the purpose of funding programs that would be in line with the objectives of their candidate or their candidate's party?  Could billions of dollars be raised in this way?
     Certainly, with Obama projected to raise a third of a billion dollars under the current limitations, he could raise several billion in an uncapped scenario, couldn't he?  Take George W. Bush, for instance:  how many billions (or tens of billions) of dollars would the defense contractors, the Halliburtons, etc., and the oil companies, both major and minor, have conditionally contributed to governmental programs in order to ensure 4 more years of his presidency?  If Kerry had won, they would be out nothing.  If Bush pulled it out, the resulting friendly legislative environment could easily cover the program outlay many times over in the course of the ensuing 4 years and beyond.