Going public.

The decision by John Edwards to accept the benefits and restrictions of the public financing system for the primary election, holding open the option of continuing the policy through the general if his Republican opponent does likewise, has created a certain amount of furor around the blogosphere. It's enough for Kos to write him off, not on any substantive ground, but for fear of...

"...six months of darkness. Six months in which the Republicans will be beating
the crap out of him, because they won't do anything so foolish. Six months
to turn Edwards into the devil incarnate, with no money to hit back."

Edwards' campaign manager David Bonior offers assurance...

Rest assured, we are prepared for this campaign to go the distance. We have a comprehensive campaign spending plan is smart and targeted and based on a strategy to ensure that we not only have enough money on hand to clinch the nomination but also have a reserve to take the fight to the Republican nominee in the spring.

…and adds not only a critical part of the Edwards' strategy, but one of the principle reasons I support him.

"...part of this campaign is about restoring the power of the Democratic Party."

Neil the Ethical Werewolf is notably sanquine among the big bloggers…

I doubt that the spending caps that come with public funds will cripple Edwards in the general election, as Ezra and Markos think. We aren't talking about a congressional campaign here -- we're talking about a race for president, where free media and ads from 527 groups are going to be way more significant than anything the candidates themselves put on air.

…and he's right about this, too...

...Edwards has been able to maintain the media profile of a first-tier candidate, without the first-tier money.

Of course, that changes. With this decision, Edwards levels the financial playing field considerably...

"Before we did this," one adviser said, "there were only two campaigns [Obama's and Clinton's] who thought they'd be around before the primaries with about $20M or $30M on hand. Now, we're going to be right there with them. We're going to have between $18M and $21M on hand now. That'll give us a huge boost."

"The bigger implication here is that there are now three campaigns with major wherewithall going into the primaries," the aide said.

That's huge. Significant, too, is the chance to gain an inarguable advantage in debate about campaign finance and the pressures and influences that follow the money. Edwards advisor Joe Trippi puts it plainly…

"Iowa gets to choose between a Democrat who is taking the money of health care lobbyists and insurance lobbyists and corporate lobbyists and PACs who will almost certainly blow through the spending limits that they would have to abide by under public financing against a Democrat who has never taken a dime of PAC money and has never taken a dime of lobbyists money, and now, will stay within the public financing system in Iowa, which will give the people of Iowa the change to decide who will go to Washington and represent them on all these issues?"

I'm a biased observer, but the advantages for Edwards, and for people interested in seeing a progressive voice remain competetive in the field, seem obvious and, on balance, overwhelming.