OUR VIEW: Adhering to four principles could change political campaigns

Back in 2002 when then-Gov. Jim Hodges was being challenged by Republican Mark Sanford, both candidates agreed to a campaign code of conduct put forth by the S.C. Project on Campaign Conduct, under the direction of the Jim Self Center at Clemson University. The S.C. League of Women Voters and the Robert J. Rutland Center of Ethics are partners in an effort spurred by a call by the Institute for Global Ethics.

With all that backing and all the pledging, the campaign for governor still deteriorated. Campaign ads attacked one for selling out disabled children while the campaign manager for the other was sending out e-mails to reporters about how much the opponent resembled a pictured person in traditional Arab clothing, a person he termed Taliban.

Whether such pledges in the end will matter in most races is doubtful. When the races are tight and the stakes are high, one attack seems to precipitate another.

Campaigns will say they are simply making legitimate comparisons and pointing out where one candidate differs from another, but many ads then and now do so by casting the opponent in a decidedly negative light.

Nothing short of a commitment to a more positive campaign and corresponding positive results in the polls and ultimately an election victory will change things. For any candidate willing and ready to make such a commitment, there's a blueprint.

Called the "Four-Way Test of Things We Think, Say and Do," the guidelines are a cornerstone of the public service organization Rotary International. Wonder how many politicians and their commercials could pass the test?

"First, is it the truth?

"Second, is it fair to all concerned?

"Third, will it build good will and better relationships?

"Fourth, will it be beneficial to all concerned?"

As much as a political campaign is about someone winning and losing, it may be unlikely that everything said and done will be beneficial to all. But tearing down one's opponent is not what our political system should be about. It's about the people making a choice between different candidates, all willing to be in public service. In a sense, no one is a loser.

We're casting our vote for the Four-Way Test as a guide for political campaigns. Who will join us?