We have got to stop the corruption of "for hire" politicians. Each election season, big business and the affluent spend millions of dollars to get their politician elected. After the elections these entities get their spoils in the form of government contracts and beneficial legislation which quickly makes back the money they poured into the election. I propose an alternative form of camapign finance.
Clean Elections gives candidates the option to qualify for public funding to run their campaigns. While the specifics vary, typically a candidate must collect a set number of small qualifying contributions—usually $5—from people in their district. The number of signatures and contributions required varies according to the office sought.
If a candidate runs under the Clean Elections system and is outspent by a privately funded opponent, the law will typically provide a matching grant to the publicly funded candidate, up to a limit. Extra funding is also often available if there is independent spending against a candidate by an outside group or individual.
Candidates who choose not to be participate in the Clean Elections system can raise money from private donors, but must follow state campaign finance limits and disclosure laws. Clean Elections laws must be voluntary to comply with the Supreme Court’s 1976 Buckley v. Valeo ruling, which specifically approved of voluntary public financing systems.
To find out more about clean elections checkout the website publiccampaign.org
Monday, November 24, 2008
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Bye-Bye Big 3
No more bailouts! That is something to get excited about, but is it going to happen? Detroit has already flown into Washington on their private jets with their platinum cups in hand begging for money. Is it just me or has Detroit been losing money for years and now they’re blaming the financial crisis for losses. Oh no, it’s not the financial tsunami that put the automakers in this pickle it was there own ineptness.
According to the big three they built huge gas guzzlers because the American people wanted them and these gas guzzlers were supposedly hugely profitable. Well let’s look closer into that. The balance sheet of GM indicates that they have lost money since 2005 when the economy was still humming along. Ford is in a similar predicament. They have lost money since 2006. Since Chrysler is now private it is hard to look at their books to see how much they were bleeding, but we can see what they sold for as a gauge. In 1998 Daimler purchased Chrysler for $37 billion and conversely in 2007 Chrysler went private for the whopping sum of $7 billion. Not exactly what you would with a thriving profitable business model.
Everyone knows about the legacy costs and failed bargaining agreements with the UAW that have placed the big three into this situation. It was not the financial crisis, but the inevitable compounding burden that these union contracts have placed on these companies that are to blame. Foreign automakers who build in America average $48 a hour in salary and benefits, but the big 3 average $75 a hour for the same thing. Why the big difference? Foreign automakers don’t have unionized workers and their sense of entitlement.
Bankruptcy would be a blessing and not a curse for the big 3. It would allow them to tear up all non-beneficial contracts including those with the UAW. It would settle current debt issues and provide a clean slate to move forward. Contrary to popular belief filing for bankruptcy does not mean that the kitchen is closed and the big 3 would blow away and never be heard from again.
If the politicians do bailout Detroit then where does it stop? Retailers are suffering, restaurants are suffering, manufacturing is suffering it appears that everyone is suffering so where do the handouts/bailouts/bridge loans end? The only question that remains is will congress act in the best interest of the country and not the lobbyists. The funding for these bailouts comes from loans that WE have to pay interest on for years to come. Why should we pay for 10-20-30 years to come to bailout business models that were failing before the financial crisis and will continue to falter after the dust clears?
According to the big three they built huge gas guzzlers because the American people wanted them and these gas guzzlers were supposedly hugely profitable. Well let’s look closer into that. The balance sheet of GM indicates that they have lost money since 2005 when the economy was still humming along. Ford is in a similar predicament. They have lost money since 2006. Since Chrysler is now private it is hard to look at their books to see how much they were bleeding, but we can see what they sold for as a gauge. In 1998 Daimler purchased Chrysler for $37 billion and conversely in 2007 Chrysler went private for the whopping sum of $7 billion. Not exactly what you would with a thriving profitable business model.
Everyone knows about the legacy costs and failed bargaining agreements with the UAW that have placed the big three into this situation. It was not the financial crisis, but the inevitable compounding burden that these union contracts have placed on these companies that are to blame. Foreign automakers who build in America average $48 a hour in salary and benefits, but the big 3 average $75 a hour for the same thing. Why the big difference? Foreign automakers don’t have unionized workers and their sense of entitlement.
Bankruptcy would be a blessing and not a curse for the big 3. It would allow them to tear up all non-beneficial contracts including those with the UAW. It would settle current debt issues and provide a clean slate to move forward. Contrary to popular belief filing for bankruptcy does not mean that the kitchen is closed and the big 3 would blow away and never be heard from again.
If the politicians do bailout Detroit then where does it stop? Retailers are suffering, restaurants are suffering, manufacturing is suffering it appears that everyone is suffering so where do the handouts/bailouts/bridge loans end? The only question that remains is will congress act in the best interest of the country and not the lobbyists. The funding for these bailouts comes from loans that WE have to pay interest on for years to come. Why should we pay for 10-20-30 years to come to bailout business models that were failing before the financial crisis and will continue to falter after the dust clears?
Saturday, November 22, 2008
A call to action
Recent events have again brought to the forefront the recurring theme that our politicians refuse to work for the people. They suffer from some or all of the following. Being inept, unintelligent, dishonest, disconnected and/or leaderless.
The question remains though who is to blame for their inability to work in the best interest for the people. Is it the American people who continue to vote in the same clowns spouting the same rhetorical B.S. year after year or is it the political system as a whole that puts the interest of lobbyist and campaign contributors in the top slot for the politician's concern. I say the answer is both.
First, the American people seem more concerned with what the latest contestant of American Idol thinks than what their politicians think. They're more concerned with how their favorite sports team is performing rather than how their government is performing. They're more concerned with what is the most immediately gratifying versus what is our best long term interest. So we vote based on issues we are ignorant on and for politicians that give us immediately what we desire. A question to probe at a later time is what we desire our politicians to be. Should they truly represent us in all our uninterested and ignorant glory or should they LEAD us looking more at the future consequences of their decisions rather than what the latest skewed poll says we want them to do.
Second, books upon books have been written about what is wrong with Washington. So I shall only touch upon a few of the issues that I consider to be the most egregious.
Campaign contributions - the American people pay the politicians salaries, but big business and lobbyist pay to get them elected. So if getting elected guarantees you get the paycheck then who do you think the politicians care the most about. As long as we allow businesses and wealthy individuals to back the politician that best serves their interest we'll never get a politician that serves our interest. I believe all campaigns should be paid out of taxed money. Expensive you say, well consider how much money is given away and policies put in place that benefit the current campaign contributors. The best thing about taxed campaign financing is that we the people decide how much these clowns spend on their campaigns. Also, when the election is decided by who has the best policies rather than the most money we'll get the best the person for the job.
Earmarks and grants - We seem to forget that these guys are spending OUR money. So every time you see an earmark or grant that goes to benefit a road program for lets say Houston TX that program is being paid by the taxes of all 50 states. So the local or state population elects their US congressman and that congressman then earmarks all of our money into his local economy. Now take that problem and multiply it numerous times for all of the congressman trying to get in the good graces of their voters. How much of our tax dollars are being spread through out the US on projects we did not vote on or approve. I got a novel idea. If you want to better your local community use your own money.
No line item veto - Refer to the above earmark section. Give the president the power to look past the pork and cut it from legislation. Once it is vetoed it can go back to congress and they can vote on that measure individually. This forces each congressman to be put on the record that they voted on wasteful spending and they can't hide behind the good intentions of the original bill to justify their vote.
Keeping these items in mind we need to change our ways and I mean all of us. No more uninterested and uninformed voters. Also we need to change how Washington is fundamentally ran so we get the best people doing the job working for the people that voted them in place. Change is coming and I hope it's a change for the better.
The question remains though who is to blame for their inability to work in the best interest for the people. Is it the American people who continue to vote in the same clowns spouting the same rhetorical B.S. year after year or is it the political system as a whole that puts the interest of lobbyist and campaign contributors in the top slot for the politician's concern. I say the answer is both.
First, the American people seem more concerned with what the latest contestant of American Idol thinks than what their politicians think. They're more concerned with how their favorite sports team is performing rather than how their government is performing. They're more concerned with what is the most immediately gratifying versus what is our best long term interest. So we vote based on issues we are ignorant on and for politicians that give us immediately what we desire. A question to probe at a later time is what we desire our politicians to be. Should they truly represent us in all our uninterested and ignorant glory or should they LEAD us looking more at the future consequences of their decisions rather than what the latest skewed poll says we want them to do.
Second, books upon books have been written about what is wrong with Washington. So I shall only touch upon a few of the issues that I consider to be the most egregious.
Campaign contributions - the American people pay the politicians salaries, but big business and lobbyist pay to get them elected. So if getting elected guarantees you get the paycheck then who do you think the politicians care the most about. As long as we allow businesses and wealthy individuals to back the politician that best serves their interest we'll never get a politician that serves our interest. I believe all campaigns should be paid out of taxed money. Expensive you say, well consider how much money is given away and policies put in place that benefit the current campaign contributors. The best thing about taxed campaign financing is that we the people decide how much these clowns spend on their campaigns. Also, when the election is decided by who has the best policies rather than the most money we'll get the best the person for the job.
Earmarks and grants - We seem to forget that these guys are spending OUR money. So every time you see an earmark or grant that goes to benefit a road program for lets say Houston TX that program is being paid by the taxes of all 50 states. So the local or state population elects their US congressman and that congressman then earmarks all of our money into his local economy. Now take that problem and multiply it numerous times for all of the congressman trying to get in the good graces of their voters. How much of our tax dollars are being spread through out the US on projects we did not vote on or approve. I got a novel idea. If you want to better your local community use your own money.
No line item veto - Refer to the above earmark section. Give the president the power to look past the pork and cut it from legislation. Once it is vetoed it can go back to congress and they can vote on that measure individually. This forces each congressman to be put on the record that they voted on wasteful spending and they can't hide behind the good intentions of the original bill to justify their vote.
Keeping these items in mind we need to change our ways and I mean all of us. No more uninterested and uninformed voters. Also we need to change how Washington is fundamentally ran so we get the best people doing the job working for the people that voted them in place. Change is coming and I hope it's a change for the better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)