We hear about it a lot in the media, and it is a fact that money influences politics.  Do you feel that it is out of control?  Is there anything that can actually be done?  Anyone have any good ideas on how to fix the system?

Yes, it's a huge problem.

I'm personally familiar with one local political race being influenced by a HUGE influx of out-of-state money.  One candidate is outspending the other by more than three to one - and almost all of that candidates money (hundreds of thousands of dollars) is being provided by family from New York City. The other candidate has to rely on the support of co-workers, peers, and others with modest means. It takes a lot of $50 and $100 donations to make up for a few family members who can make $20,000 or $40,000 contributions out of their "couch change".

I'd prefer to see each candidate have equal access to the public, so citizens have an opportunity to get to know the candidates.  I mean really know the candidates, the way their peers and co-workers know them.

Leadership selection should be based on reality, not super-creative advertising - and that's what big money buys. Big money can make a candidate who is unremarkable in every respect seem popular, balanced and experienced; it can make a part-time employee who is not supported by peers or coworkers appear popular, balanced and invested in the community. It can make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. That's obviously NOT in the best interests of the citizens.

I have no idea how to fix this problem, but it scares the heck out of me.

What a bummer.

This situation, I would submit, isn't as dire as it is often portrayed.  Actually, I think the perception  that it IS a problem is more dangerous than the problem itself.

It takes money to get your message out.  To curtail moneys for campaining is genuinely inhibiting Free Speech.  Yes, some entities have better access to these monies - but the opposition is free to point this out in their ads.

Some of our recent ballot measures were funded by a Rich out-of-Stater who is campaining against big Government. He is connected to the Cato Institute.  This is a great example of how this big contributor/Out of State interest, was able to empower Oregonians, who don't otherwise have the $ to get out their message. 

Yes, there are imperfections with the current situation.  But to attempt to correct these imperfections will create bigger problems.

---

An ascendant man, living in a degenerate age, MUST, by definition, live in contradistinction to his times.

Well put, Badgerr. I too am less concerned about the money in campaigning than most. I am, however, very much in favor of the move underway in DC and Salem to put a stop to the out and out bribery of public officials by lobbyists. 

Country Gardener:

Well put, Badgerr. I too am less concerned about the money in campaigning than most. I am, however, very much in favor of the move underway in DC and Salem to put a stop to the out and out bribery of public officials by lobbyists. 

Bribery of public officials has been illegal as long as I can remember.

 

I believe that fund-raising for the big ticket positions -- State and National Representatives and Senators, Presidential nominees -- will always have to occur because of the costs involved in running a campaign.  Records for all of the donations should be easily accessible to the public, so that we can make up our own minds about who the candidate represents.

For local elections, I believe that there should be a forum or a park day, where all of the candidates can gather and informally answer questions from their constituents.  This would allow candidates with a good message to have a level playing field -- if just for that afternoon -- with candidates who may just have a good checkbook. 

I'm learning first hand the hard truths about campaign finance and politics.  As a candidate for the May 15th Springfield School Board election, I've done my best to advertise my positions and my campaign -- by blogging, on my website, emailing friends and neighbors, my family wearing the 4 campaign tshirts that I had printed, and the two handmade signs I made with waterproof posterboard and Sharpies outside of my house.  The campaign finance laws state that if a candidate spends over $300 then they have to file financing reports.  I'm at about $220 right now -- and I don't expect to go over that by much.  When I filed for the election, I stubbornly set my budget at $299 of my own money -- I didn't want to have to file the finance reports, I didn't want to have to feel beholden to any contributors,  I didn't want to take important household money away from my family, and I had this crazy thought that good policy and a common sense platform would somehow speak for itself.

My point is that many of us have great ideas and would be exceptional participants in the political arena at all levels, but that the expense needed to adequately advertise in the current markets for just simple little school board elections is unbelievable.  The printed campaign signs that litter stoplight areas, intersections, and nicely kept homes start at about $50 apiece for a 2'x2' sign.  Because of volume discounts and printing set-up fees, for about $2000 a candidate can get several hundred to plaster around the neighborhoods. Advertising in the paper or on the radio starts at about $150 and goes up from there.  Direct mailing (which no one really likes to get anyway) begins with the 24 cent postage for a post card -- and if you have enough money you can buy addresses from the elections office of people who have voted recently and then you can send your printed advertising to those likely voters.  Even a permit for a bulk mailing fee usually ends up being uneconomical in smaller mailings.

I wonder how many potential statesmen or stateswomen will never be heard?   

___________________

If you live in the Springfield School District and you believe in fiscal responsibility in elected officials, see my policy positions at www.trishabarnes.clearwire.net .

 

Anyone who doesn't think that money influences politics has another think com'in. The main reason that we live in the wealthiest nation in history, yet we have folks working two jobs, with no healthcare, and kids going to bed hungry, along with public schools that are in decline is all related to our representives being influenced by corporate money.

Read any John Grisham lately?

time4change:

Anyone who doesn't think that money influences politics has another think com'in. The main reason that we live in the wealthiest nation in history, yet we have folks working two jobs, with no healthcare, and kids going to bed hungry, along with public schools that are in decline is all related to our representives being influenced by corporate money.

Read any John Grisham lately?

Yes. "The Appeal" is a good read, and a painfully accurate description of American politics. Liberal and conservative groups alike pour hundreds of millions into political campaigns, almost all of which is used to create politicians from polling data and shape our opinion of them.

Obama is winning the current money race, then Hillary, with McCain a distant third. That may well change once we're past the primary.

Is it possible to register to vote in Oregon without the State making money, ie taxing, by selling your personal information to anyone willing to pay them money? Because "everyone else does it" is not a defence, it is just an excuse.