Sept. 10, 2009 -- Do you want your children to inherit a world where most people are serfs toiling in the fields of a corporate feudal lord? I'm betting the answer is no, but if the people of the United States ever hope to take back our government from the corporate oligarchy now running the show, our only hope rests on campaign finance reform.
In spite of recent legislation such as McCain-Feingold, powerful well heeled interests still decide who we elect to most political offices and how those lawmakers vote. The second a candidate is sworn in, fund raising for the next election cycle begins.
Despite claims to the contrary, most funding for President Obama's 2008 campaign came from powerful multinational corporations, PAC's, and industrial interests. Yes, millions of private citizens, myself included, sent candidate Obama small amounts of cash, giving his campaign a slight advantage over his opponent, but the really big donors; bundlers like Goldman-Sachs, Time Warner, JP Morgan Chase, and others are the ones who dictate the agenda for our president and most other elected officials.
If we're to ever make the sweeping changes needed to create a better civilization, we must first remove private money and it's undue influence from our electoral process.
U.S. Senate campaigns today require at least a few million dollars to run a competitive race; most cost much more. A quick visit to OpenSecrets.org reveals that for the upcoming 2010 Senate election cycle, the pharmaceutical and health products industry alone has already contributed $3,441,527 to all Senate campaigns combined, and we're still more than twelve months from election day.
The more money an industrial lobby, trade group, PAC, or corporate entity can raise for a candidate, even one they disagree with, the more likely that candidate is to think twice before voting against the hand that feeds him or her. As long as our elections allow private funding, only wealthy, well connected candidates will have an opportunity to serve, and only well heeled donors will have any real influence on substantial legislation.
How do we remove the cancer without killing the patient?
One suggested path to reform comes from a group called Public Campaign, a non-profit, non-partisan organization "dedicated to sweeping campaign reform that aims to dramatically reduce the role of big special interest money in American politics." The group supports a piece of legislation called the Fair Elections Now Act (S. 752 and H.R. 1826).
According to the Public Campaign website, the Fair Elections Now Act "would allow federal candidates to choose to run for office without relying on large contributions, big money bundlers, or donations from lobbyists, and would be freed from the constant fundraising."
Sounds like a winner, right?
I thought so until I read the summary of the bills, which leaves me thinking this is just one more half measure in a long line of past reform attempts. The folks at Public Campaign may believe that this legislation will change things, but I'm convinced it won't.
Any reform measure that doesn't absolutely ban all private funding from our electoral process is nothing more than lip service to a disenchanted electorate. Real electoral reform will have teeth; big, jagged, ugly teeth like a shark. Teeth you wouldn't risk getting too close to.
True reform would require all candidates to operate within a finite public financing system and it would put an end to endless campaign seasons by placing time limits on primary and general election cycles. Funding qualifications would only require a reasonable number verifiable petition signatures gathered within the state or district a candidate wished to represent. Reform of presidential campaigns, primary and general should also operate in a similar manner.
Would it cost more? Yes and no.
In terms of government funding it would certainly require more, but the amount of private sector money that is now funneled into lobbying and political action committees would more than offset the effect of any increases in taxes or other fees on the economy.
True campaign finance reform faces almost insurmountable obstacles on the path to a presidential signature. Too many wealthy corporate interests stand to lose great power if real reform happens in this country, but it must happen.
***
Thurman James is an aspiring writer, artist and advocate for peaceful revolution. He seeks real world solutions to real world problems, even when the solutions he finds are far off the beaten American path. He believes in doing what matters, and encouraging others to do the same.
A large team of social scientists, psychologists and geriatric specialists affiliated with a host of institutions across the U.S. reports that women who remain optimistic…
A nationwide study of 196 cities shows that housing discrimination from 90 years ago still casts a historical shadow of inequities in colon cancer care…
New report highlights global strategies for accelerating AI in science and researchA comprehensive analysis of the integration of artificial intelligence in science and research across various countries addresses both the advancements made and the challenges faced…
techxplore.com/news/2024-03-highlights-global-strategies-ai-science.html
Amazon bets $150 billion on data centers required for AI boomAmazon.com Inc. plans to spend almost $150 billion in the coming 15 years on data centers, giving the cloud-computing giant the firepower to handle an…
techxplore.com/news/2024-03-amazon-billion-centers-required-ai.html
Responsible AI: Three tools to help businessesArtificial Intelligence (AI) is one of the most powerful tools developed in recent decades. And, as the saying goes, with great power comes great responsibility.
techxplore.com/news/2024-03-responsible-ai-tools-businesses.html
White House sets policies for federal AI use"Concrete safeguards" for government use of artificial intelligence were announced by the White House Thursday, as it vowed they would serve as a model for…
techxplore.com/news/2024-03-white-house-policies-federal-ai.html
Are schools that feature strong test scores highly effective, or do they mostly enroll students who are already well-prepared for success? A study co-authored by…