
photo mercola.com
National Public Radio's Morning Edition is running a story today about the possibility that the 2012 Presidential election will be a "multibillion-dollar contest."
The Dems are expected to raise at least a billion for President Obama's re-election, which means the Republicans can't be left out of this high dollar party.
According to the article (link below), President Obama raised $746 million in 2008, double what President Bush raised four years before. That 2004 amount was double what Bush the Younger himself raised in 2000.
This is outrageous. When I was in competitive high school speech long before the Civil War, one of our topics was campaign financing. Two simple ideas could completely change this madness.
Limit the amount of spending. And mean it. (Can you say Citizen's United? Despite Clarence Thomas not speaking in court for five years, his vote said a lot on that decision. Can't you see he and Ginny, sitting at home in their Statue of Liberty hats, drinking a toast to all the corporations that support their causes? Cheers!)
Have more frequent debates, broadcast from Washington DC. With today's technology, there is no need for 24/7 advertising. Use C-Span or some other existing channel. Debates could be topical (in a sense they are now, but seem to always derail.)
The debates would be widely covered, and possibility eliminate the need for the multi-state, multi-stop tours candidates make. Since funds would be limited, more focus could shift to issue-oriented debates.
Of course this is Pie In the Sky, because those who benefit (the candidates) continue to justify all the spending. The article shares an anecdote about former House Majority Leader Tom Delay.
"There's not enough money in politics," Delay told a C-Span audience, "You know, Americans spend more on potato chips than they do on elections?"
Each passing election makes me want to turn the television off. And my spouse and I are huge political junkies. Debate night at our house is like the Super Bowl and the Olympic Opening in one. However, living at the junction of three states, we are bombarded with television and radio commercials for candidates from Indiana, Kentucky, and Illinois, and this year looks like will be no different.
Pass the French onion dip.
http://www.npr.org/2011/02/18/133809150/2012-the-year-of-the-billion-dollar-campaigns


Salon.com
Comments
`R
♥
rated with hugs
I can say for a fact that I spent more money on my candidates in 2008 and 2010 than I did on chips of any kind and I'm still hungry.
Congrats on the EP!
I think (actually agree with) because this isn't my idea, they should have a month to campaign - if they can't get their message out in a month then they don't have anything worthwhile to say. And in that month's time they get all of their media appearances for free.
I agree with Reflections - soon they will be officially sponsored by Taco Bell.
Best Wishes,
Blittie
All the campaign ads do for me is make me hate the politician it claims to promote. Unfortunately, I love, love, love potato chips!
Lezlie
r
Send an email to cancel the transaction
We wont vote till we get satisfaction
Customer satisfaction is not on their list
But we don't get even and we dont get pissed
We send them LOVE Back for what they missed
They will get the message this time
http://open.salon.com/blog/stlfilmaker/2011/02/18/american_presidents_or_michael_corleone
(And what Alysa said.) ~r