Did You Feel The Earth Move Yesterday?
And no, I'm not talking about an earthquake.
I'm talking about the announcement yesterday that neither the Obama campaign or the Democratic Party will accept PAC or Lobbyist funding for their campaigns. That should have sent tremors through the business community and other special interests on both sides of the political spectrum. Here's why.
Like it or not, even an elected official with the purest of motives can be forced to compromise their ethics in order to raise the funds needed to conduct their campaigns. Why? Because the source of those funds has been PACs and Lobbyists and those funds come with strings attached.
Now it appears that politics is about to be revolutionized again by the power of the computer and the Internet. People are now realizing that if they want the candidates of their choice to have a voice, then the candidate must have money.
What's more (this is something I almost mentioned in my weekly Ezine yesterday, but I was trying to hold down the size of it) they are also realizing the impact of statistics and demographics. In other words, 10% of the country may control 90% of the money, but that doesn't mean the other 90% are powerless.
If there are 130 Million households in this country (which is close to the real number) and each household gives even $10 to the Party of their choice, then that Party has $1 Billion 300 Million to fund their campaign with.
And if elected officials can be funded by ordinary folks, then they cannot be controlled by lobbyists and special interests. What that means to you is that more and more elected officials could be legislating policy and setting budgets based on what's best for ordinary people, not special interests.
Can you feel the earth move now?
I'm talking about the announcement yesterday that neither the Obama campaign or the Democratic Party will accept PAC or Lobbyist funding for their campaigns. That should have sent tremors through the business community and other special interests on both sides of the political spectrum. Here's why.
Like it or not, even an elected official with the purest of motives can be forced to compromise their ethics in order to raise the funds needed to conduct their campaigns. Why? Because the source of those funds has been PACs and Lobbyists and those funds come with strings attached.
Now it appears that politics is about to be revolutionized again by the power of the computer and the Internet. People are now realizing that if they want the candidates of their choice to have a voice, then the candidate must have money.
What's more (this is something I almost mentioned in my weekly Ezine yesterday, but I was trying to hold down the size of it) they are also realizing the impact of statistics and demographics. In other words, 10% of the country may control 90% of the money, but that doesn't mean the other 90% are powerless.
If there are 130 Million households in this country (which is close to the real number) and each household gives even $10 to the Party of their choice, then that Party has $1 Billion 300 Million to fund their campaign with.
And if elected officials can be funded by ordinary folks, then they cannot be controlled by lobbyists and special interests. What that means to you is that more and more elected officials could be legislating policy and setting budgets based on what's best for ordinary people, not special interests.
Can you feel the earth move now?
YES, I felt the tremors. I was so "moved" that, for the first time in my life, I immediately got on the internet and donated some money. I felt it was my duty to contribute! In the past I always felt "why bother, the PACs and lobbyists will out-spend and out-influence me." This is one way voters can now take back elections from the big-monied special interests and make politicians accountable to us. I hope thousands of others feel this way too and give! Whether Obama wins or loses, if he shows that enough ordinary folks will donate to his campaign, this will encourage other politicians (Democarat, Republican, and other parties) in the future to go this route. Change, indeed!
Reply to this
Larry and Peter,
I am all for limiting the effect of the big money on elections and on our policy-making. Spending big money, like $250,000,000, trying to be elected to a $400,000 a year job, is really over the top.
I am enough of a skeptic to wonder if this is a political ploy or an actual attempt at reform. (I almost wrote "Change")
I read about this in Politico.com. They are less enthusiastic.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/10899.html
I appreciate the civil and reasonable tone on this website. I am really offended by the name-calling and character assassination I find on many other sites. It is a relief to be able to express an opposing point of view and discuss the issues.
Just my opinion.
Reply to this
Hi Jim,
I agree with your praise about this website. We can all thank Larry for giving us this safe, sane forum to express our firmly-held opinions as well as to explore our evolving beliefs on new issues we are still wrestling with. By not being attacked by dogmatic extremists from any side to shut us down, my ongoing learning is enhanced. Thanks, Larry.
Reply to this
Thanks, guys. But maybe dogmatic extremists bring more traffic.
Reply to this
Larry,
I'm confused.
Hot off the presses: "Barack Obama is abandoning public financing for his presidential campaign, reversing his earlier stance in bold certainty he can raise millions more on his own as the first major-party candidate to bypass the tax-checkoff system that was hurried into place after the Watergate scandal."
Does this in any way contradict his earlier statement (as you summarized above) "neither the Obama campaign or the Democratic Party will accept PAC or Lobbyist funding for their campaigns."
I guess I don't understand the difference between accepting "public financing" and going directly to the public to solicit donations. Has he changed anything he has previously said and, if so, does it make a difference?
Yes, I'm confused.
Thanks for some clarification on financing presidential elections.
Reply to this
Peter,
Campaign financing is not my strong suit, but I'll give this a shot and someone can help clean up after me.
Do you know on your tax form there's a place where you can check to contribute money to the Presidential election fund? That's public financing. The government allocates monies for the Presidential election campaigns. The rules say you can't have public (tax money) financing and private money, too. If you take public money and your opponent doesn't, then your opponent has the potential to raise more money than you. More money means you can campaign in more places and in different ways than your opponent. You can make public accusations that your publically financed opponent can't respond too, because they lack the money.
Here's what the Obama campaign manager had to say about it today. I'll take out the money pitch.
I want to add a little context to the video message you received earlier announcing that we will not participate in the public financing system for the general election.
Even though we stood to receive more than $80 million in taxpayer funding for our campaign, the system has been so gamed and exploited by our opponents that it is effectively broken.
John McCain, the Republican National Committee, and their allies in so-called 527 groups that raise and spend unlimited contributions are dedicated to manipulating this broken system to raise as much money as possible -- and they've proven that they're very good at it.
A top McCain adviser told MSNBC earlier this month, "now that we're in the general election, the RNC money counts, the DNC money counts. So the truth is today, John McCain has more cash on hand and more money than Barack Obama does."
In April alone, they raised nearly $45 million. That's more than our campaign and the Democratic National Committee combined. And that doesn't include the plans of 527 groups like the one called "Freedom's Watch," which has said it will spend as much as $250 million under Karl Rove's direction to attack and defeat Barack Obama.
To compete, Barack has put his faith in ordinary people giving only what they can afford. That's been the strategy of this campaign from the beginning, and more than 1,500,000 supporters like you have gotten us this far.
We have a historic opportunity to prove that a movement of ordinary people has the power to change the way political campaigns are funded. And we have a clear goal as we begin this new challenge: 50,000 people declaring their independence by making a donation before July 4th. "
Hope this clarifies a bit.
Reply to this
OK, if you take public financing (a set amount given to you by the government), you can not solicit for other funds from any other source.
If you don't accept this public financing, you can and must solicit from other sources.
What are these sources: any U.S. citizen, your friends and family, organizations, businesses, foreigners, others? Are there caps on what these sources can give?
So Obama is saying he will not take money from the government (public funding) but will limit his privately funded sources to individuals only and forgo all other sources?
If this IS what Obama is doing (and I'm still unsure about what he has done/is doing), wouldn't seeking support only from individual citizens be a good thing---the ultimate finance reform we all want---by encouraging voters to take back the election process both financially and through participation? What is the down side, except for the fact that he changed his mind?
OK, I think I may have it!! So, for the *primaries* he said he would only take private funding from individuals but for the *national* election said he would take federal funding. Now he has reconsidered and says for the national election he is going to switch back to private (individual) funding???
No wonder we can't institute real finance reform; it's TOO CONFUSING!
I think I'm gonna go take some aspirin now. Maximum strength.........
Reply to this
Larry, I found this link helpful.
Federal Election Commission:
Public Funding of Presidential Elections
http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml
Reply to this
Peter,
Thanks for posting this. Very informative.
Larry
Reply to this