Should Outside Campaign Funding be banned?

[zeus3925]

This year's election has seen some incredible amounts of spending by sources outside the candidate's district. In one race in Minnesota, $15 million was spent to win a job that pays $153,000. Who is going to listen to the constituents when the return favors are called in?

Question: Should campaign funds be restricted to citizens, locals of unions, and businesses that actually headquartered in that district?

[Roger Perry]

It was reported that Florida's new Governor Rick Scott spent $75,000,000 of his own money to get elected. His opponet Alex Sink spend almost as much of her own money trying to get elected.

[Buzz]

I agree with Teddy Roosevelt on the business spending on elections part. This comes from his 1905 State of the Union Speech.

‎

"All contributions by corporations to any political committee or for any political purpose should be forbidden by law; directors should not be permitted to use stockholders' money for such purposes; and, moreover, a prohibition of this kind would be, as far as it went, an effective method of stopping the evils aimed at in corrupt practices acts. Not only should both the National and the several State Legislatures forbid any officer of a corporation from using the money of the corporation in or about any election, but they should also forbid such use of money in connection with any legislation save by the employment of counsel in public manner for distinctly legal services."

On hundred years after the 1907 Tillman Act, they're back with a vengeance.

[BonMallari]

should funding be banned...in some ways yes , but then look at Meg Whitman in Cali using some reported 140 Mil of her own money...only to get beat by Gov. Moonbeam...McCain - Feingold was/is a joke, all it did was give PAC's a legal way to funnel money to a campaign...I wish all the campaigns got a certain sum of money and thats all...once its gone, no more ads, no more travel etc...makes you wonder why they spend millions on chasing a job that on the surface pays mere thousands,

[dnf777]

Kind of defeats the entire purpose of having DISTRICTS, doesn't it? I mean, why go to the trouble of gerrymandering if the locals don't really matter anyway?

[Uncle Bill]

should funding be banned...in some ways yes , but then look at Meg Whitman in Cali using some reported 140 Mil of her own money...only to get beat by Gov. Moonbeam...McCain - Feingold was/is a joke, all it did was give PAC's a legal way to funnel money to a campaign...I wish all the campaigns got a certain sum of money and thats all...once its gone, no more ads, no more travel etc...makes you wonder why they spend millions on chasing a job that on the surface pays mere thousands,

I believe you have the answer..."ON THE SERFACE"...being the key phrase. The job first of all has little to do with the annual salary and the perks. It's how a Democrat Congress lady can accrue millions after being in office 3 terms. It's all about power, and what and who they rub elbows with, plus the retirement pay that the taxpayers continue getting gouged for throughout that persons lifetime.

Even after they become MORE brain dead than when they first ran for office, they get re-elected on the sympathy vote, so they can run up their years-in-service, only to get a higher amount of retirement.

Term limits, removing the ability to vote in their own pay raises, a 'reasonable' retirement allowance, would all go far to eliminate the career politicians. It's unrealistic I admit, but it's the only real solution to the problem that gets increasingly worse annually.

Despite this current voting session that cleansed several problems, it has another large cleansing ahead, before this nation can get back to 'thinking' we have returned to our Constitutional base. There are plenty RINOs that need replacing, along with plenty other liberal/socialist believers that will continue to be against what this nation was founded on.

It's hard for me to see any time in my future, the USA map of counties eliminating much more 'blue' on it, unless the fault line under the west coast removes everything from San Diego to Seattle. But then, that still leaves the NE, Colorado and Minnesoooota...oh well, we can't have everything.

UB

[Don Horstman]

Buzz,

If we eliminate a company's ability to donate to candidates are we also going to stop unions, PAC's, and other organizations such as the NRA from donating to candidates they support? Without the SEIU Reid never gets past Angle, even though she may not have been the best candidate. I just can't see the pols on either side agreeing to back away from this gravy train.

Just wondering where you draw the line? I am all in favor of making changes as long as all of the special interest groups on both sides of the aisle have to play by the same rules. You also have to figure in the natural bias of the majority of the major media outlets. Most of them tend to have a more liberal bias.

There is no perfect system, but even with all of the crazy amounts of money thrown into the process, I would rather have our system than live in Iran, Cuba, Venezuela etc.

[subroc]

not only no, but f#$k no.

How can special interest groups buy votes then?

all kidding aside, no. anyone should be able to support anyone he or she wants. The election of like minded individuals that support positions you believe in is worth donating to regardless of where they live.

BTW, how would you poloce such a restrictive policy?

BTW2, if you are so worried about outside influence, how about a nationwide, mandatory requirement to show an ID to vote?

That would be a far mor important start to honest elections.

Transparency of donations would be the second step.

[Marvin S]

The D's have their panties in a wad because of the SCOTUS ruling which leveled the playing field . I had this discussion last night with a person who hangs in a different crowd. My question to him was "Do you want union money also out of the race?", naturally not .

The D's have a message the public cannot afford, they've had the advantage in media support & unlimited take care of me groups. Hopefully the newly elected can return our country to the principles upon which it was founded .

[paul young]

one Senate candidate in Ct. spent over 50 million on her campaign....

totally obscene, in my opinion. she lost anyway.-Paul