A Clean and Fair Fight
We were watching NOW (and missing Bill Moyers, thank-you-very-much) the other evening, and were introduced to the concept of ''Clean Elections.'' (This is truly worth your time...grab a drink, grab some bandwidth, plug in some headphones and click on Video: Votes for sale?)
An entire NOW program dedicated to campaign finance reform sounds about as exciting as a program on how to file obscure federal tax forms. But we watched anyway. I reiterate, it's worth it.
Clean elections work on the very basic idea that political campaigns should be financed not through wealthy individuals, corporations, lobbyists or PACs, but with public money. Before everyone starts howling, first of all realize that you're talking about a cost of about $6 per year.
Also realize what else this means. It means the wealthy individuals, corporations, lobbyists and PACs are left with a comparatively low level of influence. As someone who has been personally revolted by the kind of access a lot of businesses have been granted to the legislative process (like writing the new laws themselves and handing them to the legislator to introduce and sponsor), I have to admit this looks like a mighty fine idea.
There are some rules, of course. If you choose to run this way, you have to collect a certain number of signatures and private $5 donations, and you have to agree to some basic caps. If you find yourself running against someone who DOES run with PAC money and whose ''war chest'' threatens to dwarf yours, public money begins to match your opponent's spending, dollar for dollar. So there's actually a prayer that the contest might NOT look like a case of King by Right of Cash.
There's lots more out there...try a Google search on "clean elections."
An entire NOW program dedicated to campaign finance reform sounds about as exciting as a program on how to file obscure federal tax forms. But we watched anyway. I reiterate, it's worth it.
Clean elections work on the very basic idea that political campaigns should be financed not through wealthy individuals, corporations, lobbyists or PACs, but with public money. Before everyone starts howling, first of all realize that you're talking about a cost of about $6 per year.
Also realize what else this means. It means the wealthy individuals, corporations, lobbyists and PACs are left with a comparatively low level of influence. As someone who has been personally revolted by the kind of access a lot of businesses have been granted to the legislative process (like writing the new laws themselves and handing them to the legislator to introduce and sponsor), I have to admit this looks like a mighty fine idea.
There are some rules, of course. If you choose to run this way, you have to collect a certain number of signatures and private $5 donations, and you have to agree to some basic caps. If you find yourself running against someone who DOES run with PAC money and whose ''war chest'' threatens to dwarf yours, public money begins to match your opponent's spending, dollar for dollar. So there's actually a prayer that the contest might NOT look like a case of King by Right of Cash.
There's lots more out there...try a Google search on "clean elections."
posted by Kelly at
1:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home