« Pakistan & Democracy: A Brave Woman’s Voice…
Poll: McCain Widening Lead As Floridians Vote In Florida Presidential Primary »



Ask the GOP to support Campaign Finance Reform

January 29th, 2008
By PAUL SILVER

Print Print

David Donnelly, Director, Campaign Money Watch is inviting people to sign a petition to the Republican Candidates

Once we collect signatures for this petition, we’ll fax the Republican presidential candidates a letter the day before Super Tuesday, February 5th, to urge them to support full public financing of elections.

From big campaign contributions to the influence of bundlers and lobbyists, the role of campaign cash in our electoral process has gotten worse. But none of the Republican presidential candidates have endorsed public financing.



This entry was posted on Tuesday, January 29th, 2008 at 9:32 am and is filed under Campaign Reform. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 10 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    I must have missed the part of the pledge that includes not spitting on the sidewalk, an example of where public financing has produced uncorrupted public officials and a promise to help old ladies across the street. Why would the Republicans sign such a pledge when, one they completely disagree with the premise and two that if the Democrats maintain control of congress the liklihood of unions facing such limitations is unlikely? This looks like one of those suicide pacts where the "good guys" hand a gun to the "bad guys" and with voices trembling with sincerity promise to go next.
    • ^
    • v
    Or as Thomas Jefferson put it, "To compel a man to furnish contribution of money to the propagation of opinions to which he does not agree is sinful and tyrannical."
    • ^
    • v
    All other comments notwithstanding, I signed the petition.
    • ^
    • v
    I am sympathetic with what Jefferson said. My preference would be a small tax on the media industry to fund campaigns since they are the largest beneficiary of campaign expenses.

    Since money, like water, finds all cracks, the process of perfecting representative government is a constant process that tries to minimize the opportunities for special interests to buy favorable legislation.

    Personally I hope for the Supreme Court to reverse its position that Money = Free Speech. In an increasingly global economy, transnational corporations are inclined to spend what is necessary to buy favors from financially desperate candidates.
    • ^
    • v
    Paul, I know you and Pete mean well on this, but this movement is going nowhere without a dismantling of the 527s as part and parcel. After all, just because those virtuous D's pay lip service to public financing.........

    ”These latest revelations make it clear why Edwards was able to announce that he could accept public funds while still spending all he needed to spend in Iowa,” Obama Campaign Manager David Plouffe writes. “His campaign simply exploited the biggest loophole in the campaign finance system in order to get public matching funds while arranging through allies to benefit from a 527. That’s how they avoided the spending limits that are a condition of the public matching funds.”

    On Clinton, Plouffe denounces an anti-Obama AFSCME mailer. Notably, a pro-Edwards 527, funded largely by local SEIUs, is up with positive ads in Iowa for Edwards. AFSCME and the American Federation of Teachers have been out with mailers for Clinton. Clinton has not shied away from interest groups’ money, even defending them as real people at this summer’s YearlyKos convention. Edwards has campaigned hard on a platform against Washington interest group money, and has had to balance denouncing the 527 and embracing the support of the SEIU.
    • ^
    • v
    Casualobserver,
    I agree with you that loopholes need to be tightened. So what are you doing about it?
    Are you supporting any groups or candidates committed to doing something about it?
    Do you believe that it is a lost cause?
    Do you believe that sharing your pessimism and cynicism is making a contribution to others?
    • ^
    • v
    The collapse of the Republican Party will probably make most of the campaign finance moot.

    When the Democratic primary is the ony relevant elections, then GOTV and feet on the ground will become more important than television advertising. In a one party state, politics will become a niche past time of activist and everyone else will left on the outside.
    • ^
    • v
    It seems to me that the GOP will continue to be vital in a large number of districts around the country. With redistricting reform the debate of ideas will be more robust and engage more citizens.
    • ^
    • v
    Given that 125 Democratic congressmen are running unopposed and that number will only go up, a robust debate of engaged citizens is the last thing that is going to happen.

    If you want to see the future, look at the elections in the districts currently represented by the Congressional Black Caucus. Unchallenged incumbents and handpicked successors is the future. Incompetence and criminal behavior will not be enough to unseat more than very few incumbents.
    • ^
    • v
    The power of money in politics and media is at the heart of so many bad decisions and policies that elevate narrow private interests over the public good. Public financing would help, and yes, perhaps with other changes to close loopholes. Even more effective would be stripping away the legal fantasy of "corporate personhood."