That Republicans may find their national convention in New York in 2004 a bit circumscribed, as our Timothy Starks reports at page 1 of today’s New York Sun, will raise more than a few eyebrows about town and around the country. From our vantage point, however, the national Republicans are getting their just deserts — even if it means they’ll have to skip dessert at next year’s various galas and shindigs. If campaign finance groups get their way and convince the Federal Election Commission to bar corporations from making unlimited donations to the two major parties’ convention host committees, the Republicans may finally come to rue the day they signed onto McCain-Feingold. Abridging Americans’ freedom of speech may not have put a crimp in their style, but settling for less rich food and less free-flowing wine may just hit them where they live.

Unfortunately, it may also hit New Yorkers in their pockets. If corporations aren’t allowed to give freely, the convention’s host committee will have two options: vastly expanding their donor-base or take the money from the public fisc. Neither option sounds appealing, and the second may itself be a McCain-Feingold violation, according to Mr. Stark’s dispatch. The ultimate solution would likely involve a combination of both tactics. In other words, expect New Yorkers to spend more on the convention before the politicians and delegates eat less.

The vice chairman of the FEC, Bradley Smith, argues that since Senator Kennedy has been hustling for contributions to the Democrats’ convention in Boston, there is at least the indication of a congressional intent that would allow the unlimited donations to continue. After all, Mr. Kennedy voted for McCain-Feingold. This logic seems flawed to us, though, unless Mr. Smith was trying to make a characteristically deft point: Since when do the politicians who impose rules on all Americans say and do the same thing?