Public Financing Of Campaigns

4:45 pm EST January 16th, 2007 | Politics | 12 Comments

Can someone explain to me what is to be gained by my tax dollars supporting the political aspirations of John McCain, Tom Tancredo, and Co.?

No Related Post

« Republican Disarray
Which Times Is It, Gentlemen? »

12 Responses to “Public Financing Of Campaigns”

Quaker in a Basement says:

January 16, 2007 at 6:20 pm

Because if it’s done with your tax dollars it won’t be done with money from lobbyists, corporations, and big-bucks, behind-the-scenes kingmakers?
fd10801 says:

January 16, 2007 at 6:25 pm

Ooh! Ooh! I know!
Freedom of Speech, Mr. Kotter?
Oliver says:

January 16, 2007 at 6:37 pm

Quaker: But what if I would rather big coal pay for their chosen candidate than me?
Scott_api says:

January 16, 2007 at 6:52 pm

Because I think Obama, Clinton, McCain and Tancredo can be a lot more effective doing the jobs they were elcted to do as opposed to shilling for cash from anyone and everyone under the sun.

Oliver – Look at it this way… Would you rather have Tancredo out looking for $$$, or on the floor of the House making very public, recorded speeches about his particular brand of of Conservatisim? Would you rather have Obama out looking for $$$, or on the floor of the Senate taking it to the GOP? If we publicly finance campaigns, then legislators legislate. If you get Finance Reform to apply to 527′s at the same time, you know who put at the particular hit piece on (name of candidate here).

Just my opinion…
michael says:

January 16, 2007 at 7:09 pm

Two words: President Trump.
Quaker in a Basement says:

January 16, 2007 at 7:14 pm

But what if I would rather big coal pay for their chosen candidate than me?

Then you have to accept that their chosen candidate can throw cash around like confetti.
Nick Beaudrot says:

January 16, 2007 at 7:40 pm

It’s not what is to be gained.

It’s what is lost when Hillary Clinton accepts $4200 checks from the members of the Fanjul family that runs all the sugar farms in South Florida.

It’s what is lost when John Edwards signs onto the board of Fortress Investments, for what appears to be no purpose other than to meet rich people who are likely to give to Democrats. Or when Rudy Giuliani founds his own investment bank for nearly similar purposes on the other side of the aisle.

It’s what is lost when House Intelligence Committee Chair Silvestre Reyes doesn’t know who’s Sunni and who’s Shiite, because he spends all his time raising money for himself and other Democrats. It’s what is lost when Republicans suffer the same fate.

Bob Kerrey has it right: as long as politicians must meet as many rich people as possible, both parties will be serving special interests. “Hey, I raised $100K for you; can you insert something into the tax code that will help my business?” “Hey, I rasied $250K for you; can you ease up on tarrif restrictions for these products I want to import from China?” “Hey, I raised $500K for you; can you get the SEC to slow-walk its investigation of my hedge fund?” If you want this to stop, our politicians have to have some other way to fund their campaigns.

Spending $1B of public money sounds like a lot, but it’s small compared to the $1.5T that our government oversees.
Rheinhard says:

January 16, 2007 at 9:38 pm

Also the question sort of avoids the point: the point of public financing isn’t to allow the McCains and Tancredos, who are already rich and well-known, to be able to run; but rather to allow the ordinary Joe with a good idea who otherwise couldn’t get near national office because of the lack of big money connections to have a chance.
Duros62 says:

January 17, 2007 at 1:56 pm

Two words: President Trump.

I just threw up in my mouth a little…
Dr. Anatole Gavage-Huskanoy says:

January 17, 2007 at 4:52 pm

I would say it’s more about races at the house and senate level than the presidential one. Though it’s that, too. I’m all for public financing of elections. Freedom of speech is an individual right, not a corporate one.
Duros62 says:

January 17, 2007 at 4:52 pm

On the face of it, it seems like a good idea that a government for the people, by the people should reasonably be finaced by for the people, by the people.
Having said that, that sort of honesty in government is the stuff of legends and fantasy…
Ted Kilvington says:

January 20, 2007 at 3:51 am

Your tax dollars already pay for campaigns. When a million dollars in campaign donations gets someone a billion-dollar tax break, that’s another billion added to the debt we will have to repay through taxes. When a million dollars in campaign donations gets someone a billion-dollar federal contract, that federal money was raised through taxes (or debt). If giving campaigners millions of tax dollars will save us billions of tax dollars, I think all Americans (liberal, conservative, and other) would be crazy not to do it.