Does Money Make It Right? By OneMann [0] [0]- Wed, 08/08/2007 - 9:04pmAnother blogger has twice mentioned the need to raise big money in order to attain political viability, either as a candidate for office or to support or oppose possible amendments to the Clay County Charter. The writer added that not believing so meant one was not living in the real world. In the past few years there have been quite a few changes in local government, from those elected officials who retired or were otherwise forced out of office to a Charter addition mandating a new ethics ordinance to, next year, adding two new members to the County Commission.My question is this: Has the American electoral system been reduced to merely who raises the most money and, if so, what does that say about local politics?
Oneman, to answer your Question's; [0]Submitted by winn1955 [0] on Thu, 08/09/2007 - 1:18pm.Oneman, to answer your Question's; Has the American electoral system been reduced to merely who raises the most money, and if so, what does that say about local politics”? The answer to the first part of your Question is yes. The political arena has been reduced to who has the most in their war chest, and it is truly unfortunate to have too depend on the dollar to win an election. Baxley hit the nail on the head when he said name recognition, but he did not mention the second reason. An election is about two items, as Baxley stated; name recognition, and Two, being able to express your point of view. And in order to achieve those goals; one must be able to put those two items in front of the people. And how do we do that? We gather as many donations as possible, build a war chest, use our own money, and advertise, advertise, advertise. The second part of your question, “and if so, what does that say about local politics”? That’s an easy one. It say’s that the politician with the biggest war chest will most likely win the election, sad but true. And as Baxley states; “there’s the rub”. Baxley you say, “It seems almost un-American in some ways, but maybe it is oh-so-American. I hate it. I wish there were some other way, but how? Here is my opinion on how too change it. With today’s technology there is absolutely no reason that anyone running for any office should have to pay to make the two points that I stated above. An election benefits any and every American involved in that particular election, whether national, or local. So ask yourselves; what is a politician? The answer; they are a public servants. Yes that is right; they serve you and me. So! Here is what we do, send a bill to the legislators that would require all elections to be broadcast as a public service announcement. Give the politician an equal X amount of time to make the two points mentioned above. For a more in-depth announcement on the positions, and views send the people too a web page. All the media outlets should be involved. If need be give the media outlets and incentive in the form of a tax break. The more time given to the election the bigger the tax break for that media outlet. Sounds to simple, it may be, but it would work! It would place anyone that wanted to run for office on an even playing field. If adopted even a poor man like me could run for office.
It take an unsatisfied person to make things satisfactory! Winn1955Ps:
Take note on how I made reference to the questions. I copied and pasted onemans, and Baxley’s questions too my answers used italics, and bold. This makes it easier to follow a thread in any blog. As R.K. would say, just another tip from Winn1955
Money and Elections [0]Submitted by Baxley [0] [0]on Fri, 08/10/2007 - 5:57pm.Winn - I think I understand the general idea: equal, publicly funded, time for all candidates to level the playing field. All candidates? What if there were 30 or 40? Who would decide who gets to play?I like the general idea, but wonder about the implementation. Me saying it is improbable flies in the face of "It takes an unsatisfied person . . . " There always seems to be some sort of campaign reform under way in Congress. Why don't we ever see any changes? Or did I miss something?Tools: reply [0]
Does Money Make It Right (winn) [0]Submitted by Baxley [0] [0]on Mon, 08/13/2007 - 8:13pm.
The more I think about it, the more I like it. I'm not sure how the federal matching dollars thing works for national elections, but there is already public money used to help people campaign. Why not take the program a few steps further and figure out how to publically fund all campaigns, and make any private contributions illegal?
It probably will never happen, but think about the money corporations would save. I think it's funny how many big companies contribute to both candidates in a race just to cover their bases.
Think about the purity of a public funded election. No one would be able to cry "special interest" anymore. Boo-hoo. I haven't thought about this in detail, but maybe it would be just insanely expensive for taxpayers.Rich - got any ideas on this?
How is it handled in your future home, Canada? (Just kidding.)
Money and politics [0]Submitted by FTDOAAWM [0] [0]on Sun, 08/12/2007 - 7:30pm.Money and Politics By FTDOAAWM [0] - Sun, 08/12/2007 - 12:36pm In a perfect world an elected official would serve the public for one or two terms and then step back and let a new voice and ideas take over. I have lived in northeast Florida since the early eighties, and this has only happened once that I can think of. It was Congresswoman Tillie Fowler, but she kept her word and stepped down as promised.
In an other post on this site people are having a big discussion that it takes a big name, big money, or both to get elected. Not really true, as someone has already pointed out in St. Johns County last election big money and name recognition did not help. People were fed up with development and elected two commissioners that promised to stop or at least slow down development. It was also suggested that only a certain number or “qualified” people be allowed to run. May I ask who gets to pick who is qualified and how many. No thanks this is America anyone that wants to run and meets all qualifications should be allowed to run. Plus it was also said a fund be set up and each candidate be given an equal amount from the fund and that is all the money they can spend on their election, or at least that is how I interrupted the post. Where does the money for this “fund” come from? Let me guess TAX money, no thank you. The sad fact is it takes money to get elected. If you do not like where a candidate gets his money from, run for office yourself, or find someone you can support and go door to door for him or her and collect money, hold bake sales, yard sales, car washes, whatever it takes (but don’t stand on street corners or in traffic earn the money don’t beg it) to get your person elected. On election day offer to drive people to the poles to vote, and that is the biggest problem people do not vote.
Clay County is changing , I got here in the early eighties and it was the good ol boy program type of government. To some it may still seem that way, but it has gotten better. Maybe if we had better access to our government, like county meetings after 6:00P.M. so working people could attend. There is no law that says they have to meet in the afternoon, and if they say they can not complete their business in one night is there a law that says they can not meet twice as often? I do believe the money they are being paid is more than the average of a full time worker in Clay County. How about it Chairman Rutledge do you really serve the people the people of Clay County?
Baxley I would certainly like to here from other blogers on this matter. And as you say it would most certainly add purity to the election process. As far as tax payer’s expense, maybe that could be off set with a hefty application fee. I truly believe the foundation of the hypothesis would be solid. As we discussed in an earlier thread on this matter, There are two points any politician needs to get out too the public, name recognition, and the view they hold in the political arena. It would be relatively easy to make those points in the way of a public service announcement with the medias involvement. I am going to repost this blog from oneman, Does money make it right , in a revised form so that it can be brought to the front of the blog site. How about it fellow blogers, what say you?
To read the original blog, by one man, search Does Money Make It Right
It takes an unsatisfied person to make things satisfactory: Winn1955