Last week in class, we discussed campaign finance reform. This past Presidential election was the most expensive race in history, with candidates literally raising millions of dollars to finance their campaigns.
During the primary contest, then candidate Obama pledged not to accept campaign contributions from lobbyists. In fact, Obama returned thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from registered federal lobbyists during the course of his campaign. However, Obama did take money from individuals who while not registered lobbyists, were still employed at lobbyist firms. This activity, along with Obama's past contributions from lobbyists in previous races drew criticism and charges of hypocrisy.
The top spenders in the 2008 Presidential election, ranked in order from highest to lowest, were as follows: US Chamber of Commerce, Exxon Mobil, AARP, PG&E, Northrop Group, American Medical Association, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, American Hospital Association, General Electric and Verizon Communications. It is no coincidence that one can see two of our countries' biggest domestic issues reflected in this list; health care and energy.
For more information on who gave what to whom, check out the Center for Responsive Politics at: http://www.opensecrets.org/. This website will give you the full details on campaign finance and show you who has supported your politicians in the past.
My question to you this week is, "Do you think it is okay for candidates to take money from lobbyists? If it were up to you, how would you reform our campaign finance laws?" Answers are due no late than Sunday, May 17th, 2009.
I think that at this point the system is so corrupted that it would be hard to stop candidates from accepting funds from interest groups. The only way to stop it would be to take all spending into government hands and have each candidate pull from the same sized accounts of a predetermined size.
ReplyDeleteOn a moral level I have an issue with special interest groups being so closely tied to candidates, however that being said on a realistic level there is no putting the toothpaste back into the tube in regards to finance reform so why bother gnashing your teeth about a moot point.
I agree with Topher, the system is very corrupted and hard to stop candidates from accepting funds from interest groups, like topher said. If I could redo all the finacial laws, I would set a certain amount of money for each candidate and see who can pull it off with the amount they have.
ReplyDeleteWell,my thoughts are, why does everything have to be about money? Why can't candidates fight for the issues that are most important for the American people. Yes they should all have a certain amount of money and no more. It's always about the "allmight"dollar. Frankly I'm sick of all the bullshit! Stop lying to the American people and put them first!
ReplyDeleteAs long as they aren't hurting anyone I could careless. And if they aren't having a huge impact on the way the country is being ran then why not?
ReplyDeleteI am not sure how I feel about them taking money from lobbyist. I can see how it would be good for the candidates, because it allows them more options to campain. But on the other end, its not fair to other candidates who cant get the money to have good campains for themselves. I think it would be good if a specific amount of money was given to each candidate so it would be fair, but in reality, politics is not fair so that is why the campain laws are not working.
ReplyDeleteCandidates are going to find ways to get the money no matter what laws are enforced. Giving them all the same amount may work, but there's always going to be something else to complain about. If one candidate stretches their money and is able to make good use of it and the other wastes their money and doesn't have as a good campaign someone is going to question the money issue. It does pay to have people in higher places, but one has to be creative with what they have and make it work.
ReplyDeleteI do not think Candidates should accept money from lobbyists but I understand why they do it. The more money the candidates accept the more opportunities they have to express their views and opinions. The last elections proved to be an advantage because President Obama raised so much money; he was able to take over cable television. This example also proved why the media is our fourth branch of government.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Shayla, even if the candidates don't use lobbyists, they will find ways to get the money to help with their campaigns. It's unfortunate that the system is corrupt and no one will step up to correct it. Me, myself would want to do the right thing and change the law and stick to it.
ReplyDeleteLike someone stated earlier, it may work to give let each candidate have a certain amount of money for their campaigns and that way on candidate wouldn't have more money than the other.
i guess it is okay for candidates to take money from lobbysists, but if they say they wont then they shouldnt. i dont really think money should be such a significant part of the election. the people with money are the people that america sees, while others without as much money may be better candidates.the media portrays them in a different light even still.
ReplyDeleteI really have a problem with these politicians raising so much money for their campaign, but when they get elected, we have to continue to pay taxes to support their expenses. A few weeks ago when Air Force One did that photo op by Ground Zero, I was mainly upset about the fact that our hard earned money bought that Plane, the fuel, the pilots salaries, and people are using it to sight see. I get all twitchy like Lewis Black when I see things like that. It makes me crazy that these people can raise such enormous amounts of money for their campaign, and we the people are struggling to get by. Something needs to change, it just not right.
ReplyDeleteInstead of funding elections, they should focus on putting that capital towards good use. One option would be to invest that money into health care for the possibility of lower costs and the same for the electricity company.
ReplyDeleteI feel that money from lobbyists should be taken out of polotics. I feel the money should come from the campaign. If they wasnt to run for office then the campaign managers should raise the money from the citizens of the united states and not the major corperations. They have more power than we like to admit sometimes, but I guess the more money you have the more power you have.
ReplyDeletei feel that it is wrong to take money from lobbyiest because they are pretty much buying them off so that when the canidate makes a desicion on a bill or anything else he will have that person that gave him all the money in his mind because they helped so much. if someone is giving you money you are more likley to listen to what they say because u need thier money. candidates i feel have to do this so they can get air time and get thier name and political issues out its sad that our society is like that but the united states is all about who you know and how much money you have. This is how our government has worked for many years so i dont think its going to change anytime soon
ReplyDeleteNo, I do not think that it is okay for candidates to take money from lobbyists, because it opens the door - as stated previously for corruption to come in. In which we are now all experiencing the results and consequences of the corruption.
ReplyDeleteIf it was left up to me, I would reform our campaign finace laws to simply perform and flow the way that they were orginally established and to reinforce them with sanctions to follow if the law was broken. Shannon Sellars
I don't necessarily have a problem with candidates taking money from lobbyists. As long as my tax dollars aren't going towards the funding of their campaigns, then I'm all for it.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSimple case of corporate America trying to inluence our highest of authorities with capital to make decisions on their behalf.. not our country's. In agreement with Sprinkle, I think all the excess amounts of capital accumulated should be put towards more important things, such as "We the People".
ReplyDeletei dont think politicians should be allowed to accept money from lobbyists to fund their campaigns mostly because it only furthers my stereotype that all politicians are shady characters. no matter how many laws they make there will always be someone to find a loophole that they can use to pump money into a campaign. i think that politicians policing other politicians is an exercise in futility. however i do think that politicians should and will take advantage of youtube and podcasts in the upcoming elections to cut down on campaign costs.
ReplyDeleteI do not think they should be allowed to accept money, due to perception. But then you can look at it as it's all a game, and if you do not play the game then the things that matter may not get noticed. Sometimes you have to do what you have to do to get things done and use who you have to use in order to do it. I do not agree with it it, persay, in my own life, but with politics there are things that you have to do to get the job done.
ReplyDeletei think it is fine. i think that they do need to have campain money so that they can broadcast there views and get as many people to see them as possible. I don't think that it would be fair to have them pay money out of there own pocket to try to win. Another good reason why they should be able to get money through lobbyist is because if they didn't they wouldnt be able to tell everyone there views and people would vote on facts they have heard through other people and those facts are probably only half true or false.
ReplyDeleteI really don't have a strong view on candidates excepting money from lobbyists. I do see how this does open a door for corruption but I also feel that if the candidate’s intentions are not for purposeful purposes then corruption will find an avenue to come on.
ReplyDeleteIf I had an opportunity to refine the finance laws I would make it where set amounts like others have suggested that to be the limit for candidates.
I really don't know what a lobbyist really does, and I don't care if they get money they need it to campagin. An I have no clue how I would reform the law maybe say they can only give so much?
ReplyDeletei thank the company have the money it is there money and they can do what ever they wont with it i thank if the person running for office wont's the money he should take it if he needs it or wont's it.
ReplyDelete