Next step? Who cares about his next act; we better come up with ours.
There has been lots of talk about what the next step will be for newly out-of-the-courtroom former Sen. John Edwards.
Notice, we did not say, "not guilty."
It is pretty clear that Edwards knew exactly what he was doing when he took money to hide his mistress -- and it had more to do with his campaign than his sick wife.
But that does not mean that the law supported putting him in jail.
So, while there will be some who will wonder what Edwards' next move will be, let's be real, that is not what we should be concerned about right now.
If we want the Edwards case to mean something, we should take this opportunity to look much more closely at campaign finance laws -- and their actual application in elections.
We need to look hard at the pitfalls and the loopholes -- and we need to make a decision as a nation, and voters -- what we want to do about making it possible for people to run for the highest office in the land.
If we want to remove influence, we need to make sure we make that intention ironclad. And if we want full disclosure, we have to insist upon it.
In other words, if we do not want to have to endure another trial like John Edwards', we have to make sure it is not possible for some future candidate to make the same moves -- and to get away with it.
Edwards is a ghost -- and he should be.
It is what comes next that matters.
Published in Editorials on June 4, 2012 10:59 AM