The Federal Government is only Run by the Rich

Discussion in 'Politics' started by SMB, Dec 6, 2005.

  1. SMB
    Offline

    SMB Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    8
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Our current system of campaign financing is flawed. As long as private financing is allowed to go on in elections, our government legislators will continue to sell out and spend millions of dollars on elections. US elections are turning into competitions of who can spend the most money and who can get the most money...instead of who would be the best candidate for the people of America--not coporations and big private donators.

    In short, only the rich can be elected to any elected position. This needs to be changed. Mandatory public financing is the solution. Public financing is when the government gives you a set amount of money to run your campaign. This would allow ALL candidates to run on an equal footing, and not just those who have friends in high places.

    If elected, whose interests would the candidate apeal to? Yours or the one giviing him the large private contributions? Under mandatory public financing the elected legislator is being sincere and doing what's best for you--not what's best for the one who pays a lot.

    Another plus is that party affiliation doesn't really matter....here is the percenctage of each party that want mandatory public financing:

    76%Democrats

    71% Independents

    59% Republicans :banana:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403

    good idea--good luck--too late--we are owned.
     
  3. theim
    Offline

    theim Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,628
    Thanks Received:
    234
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings:
    +234
    And what exactly is suprising about a bunch of Democrats trying to tell me what I can and can't do with my own money?
     
  4. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    I am not "rich", SMB are you suggesting that I should not be allowed to donate money to a policital campaign?


    BTW where is this information from?
     
  5. SMB
    Offline

    SMB Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    8
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    You support your candidate through public financing not private donations. You can support your candidate in many ways besides donating. And this way, money doesn't matter.
     
  6. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    Money does matter.

    O.k. SMB let's assume there are 2 canidates running for a state wide office, canidate X and canidate Y.

    As part of his plateform canidate X has gone on record proposing limited gun ownership to law enforcement agents and other such type of government employees. And repeal of concealed weapons laws.

    Canidate Y has gone on record has supporting personal gun ownership, enforcing current gun control laws as opposed to new legislation. And supports gun conceal laws.

    Now as a citizen and voter I wish to support one canidate over the other (something public financing will not insure)not only with my vote but with the canidate's campaign. Gun issues are very important and distinctive when a canidate is to be considered, therefore canidate Y would recieve my support.
    However I work quite a bit and my personal time is limited. So as much as I would like to go door to door promoting my canidate it is just not possible. So as another form of support I willingly and freely choose to donate money to my canidate of choice. In turn that campaign can take my contribution and put it to work in areas of advertising, thus putting into action my 1st amendment right of free speech.

    Without the ability to do this I believe it would be an enormously gross violation of my political freedom.
     
  7. SMB
    Offline

    SMB Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    8
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    With Mandatory public financing the candidate recieves sufficient funding from the government and does not need nor requires additional support from private donations.
     
  8. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770

    and you figure that how? Seems to favor the candidate whose 'constituency' has more time to 'spare.'
     
  9. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    But giving money directly to a campaing is my freedom of speech, please answer my question. Are you suggesting that my freedom of speech be limited by the government?

    Also a link to your stats is needed to have any credibility!
     
  10. SMB
    Offline

    SMB Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    8
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Of course.

    http://members.aol.com/DrSwiney/pantry.html

    http://www.publicampaign.org/congress/howitworks.htm

    I forgot to mention a private source can be made. However, not over 100 dollars to keep the fairness.
     

Share This Page