Over the past 20+ years I’ve often thought that politicians and lobbyists would do anything, including spending vast sums of money, to accomplish their goals. I doubt they even thought about the consequences of spending this kind of money. Then the elected officials are obligated to vote according to the desires of the contributor.
While I’ve
continuously espoused the need for limits on campaign spending, I hadn’t really
looked into why something hadn’t been done about it. A couple months ago I began
doing some research on the subject.
I learned there are several reasons why, to date, we have
not installed any significant limitations on campaign spending. These reasons
were most succinctly reported by Steve Gillman (Huff Post Politics, “The Blog,”
10/23/12). As he summarized, we can’t significantly reduce the ridiculous
spending because:
- It’s a First Amendment right to speak our
minds and put
- If you limit the amount of money to a
candidate, he/she
can always get the support if you
give it to an
organization that supports him/her.
- Even if you limited contributions to $10, a
candidate
would still favor such-and-such donor over a non
donor.
would still favor such-and-such donor over a non
donor.
- With full disclosure of who gives what to
whom it’s still
quite easy to bury or hide completely an individual
name deep within an organization like PACs (political
action committees). I love that Ralph Nader suggested
members of Congress be required to wear corporate
logos of their sponsors, like race car drivers!
quite easy to bury or hide completely an individual
name deep within an organization like PACs (political
action committees). I love that Ralph Nader suggested
members of Congress be required to wear corporate
logos of their sponsors, like race car drivers!
- If you get rid of the PACs, contributors
could still pay for
advertising without the approval of the candidate.
There’s currently no law that could get around this.
advertising without the approval of the candidate.
There’s currently no law that could get around this.
- More obscure ways of contributing include: if
your
candidate is an author, for instance, you can buy lots
of his/her book and the revenue goes to the candidate.
You can later use the books as kindling.
candidate is an author, for instance, you can buy lots
of his/her book and the revenue goes to the candidate.
You can later use the books as kindling.
So, you see, there really isn’t anything we can currently do about the
obscene amount spent on this wasteful (my opinion) endeavor. Politicians are
hungry for more money. I’m hungry for a government that puts our needs ahead of
private coat pockets.
As a whole, we Americans are a pretty creative group. I hope that, in the future, we value a solution enough to put time, money and energy into a way to do things better ... better for us all.
Contact me at antoniasseniormoments@hotmail.com
or Antonia's Senior Moments on Facebook
As a whole, we Americans are a pretty creative group. I hope that, in the future, we value a solution enough to put time, money and energy into a way to do things better ... better for us all.
Contact me at antoniasseniormoments@hotmail.com
or Antonia's Senior Moments on Facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment!