The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media

View Poll Results: Should Campaingn donation be restricted to sources within a candidate's district?

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    19 70.37%
  • No

    8 29.63%
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: Should Outside Campaign Funding be banned?

  1. #1
    Senior Member zeus3925's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    West Twin Cities Metro, MN
    Posts
    2,108

    Default Should Outside Campaign Funding be banned?

    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?
    Last edited by zeus3925; 11-04-2010 at 11:50 AM.
    Zeus

    I don't want to feed an ugly dog!

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    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.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,782

    Default

    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.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  4. #4
    Senior Member BonMallari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    LV/CenTex/Idaho
    Posts
    12,548

    Default

    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,
    All my Exes live in Texas

    Quote Originally Posted by lanse brown View Post
    A few things that I learned still ring true. "Lanse when you get a gift, say thank you and walk away. When you get a screwing walk away. You are going to get a lot more screwings than gifts"

  5. #5
    Senior Member dnf777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Western Pa
    Posts
    6,161

    Default

    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?
    God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!

  6. #6
    Senior Member Uncle Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    4,289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BonMallari View Post
    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
    When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

  7. #7

    Default

    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.

  8. #8
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    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.
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Pac NW
    Posts
    4,216

    Default

    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 .
    __________________________

    Marvin S

    Everyone's friend is No One's friend

    Someday your life will flash before your eyes. It's your responsibility to make sure it's worth watching!

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oakdale,ct.
    Posts
    2,776

    Default

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

    totally obscene, in my opinion. she lost anyway.-Paul
    there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •