Re: Public Financing of Judicial Elections
I can not wrap my head around the reasoning of those who think public financing is good for our republic.
By public financing the government gains control over who gets into government and who does not. I can not believe those who think W is listening on their phone calls believe this to be a good thing. Does anyone not believe the system is going to be horribly in favor of those who design the system? That is any chance of third parties of accomplishing electoral success approaches zero.
How do we decide whose campaigns are serious enough to receive public funding? Does any charlatan applying for funds receive them? So if Joe Porcine runs for state dog-catcher and spends $125,000 on a "campaign" when in reality all he am doing is living high on the hog and does not care if he gets elected does he get public financing? How do we tell if he is serious or not?
Our nation's first motto is E pluribus Unum Out of many one. This idea E Pluribus Unum is in our national DNA we voluntarily come together to form common cause whatever that cause may be. Whether it be educators agitating for higher educational spending, gun owners working to reinforce the Second Amendment, non-smokes working to ban smoking from taverns, or smokers working to resist anti-smoking legislation these groups harmonize the voices of many so our legislators hear more clearly the will of the people.
Public financing of campaigns works to split up private groups working to steer the course of our governments. Public financing proponents aim to disband the choirs. The result will be our voices will turn into annoying white noise.
By public financing the government gains control over who gets into government and who does not. I can not believe those who think W is listening on their phone calls believe this to be a good thing. Does anyone not believe the system is going to be horribly in favor of those who design the system? That is any chance of third parties of accomplishing electoral success approaches zero.
How do we decide whose campaigns are serious enough to receive public funding? Does any charlatan applying for funds receive them? So if Joe Porcine runs for state dog-catcher and spends $125,000 on a "campaign" when in reality all he am doing is living high on the hog and does not care if he gets elected does he get public financing? How do we tell if he is serious or not?
Our nation's first motto is E pluribus Unum Out of many one. This idea E Pluribus Unum is in our national DNA we voluntarily come together to form common cause whatever that cause may be. Whether it be educators agitating for higher educational spending, gun owners working to reinforce the Second Amendment, non-smokes working to ban smoking from taverns, or smokers working to resist anti-smoking legislation these groups harmonize the voices of many so our legislators hear more clearly the will of the people.
Public financing of campaigns works to split up private groups working to steer the course of our governments. Public financing proponents aim to disband the choirs. The result will be our voices will turn into annoying white noise.
Labels: Public Campaign Financing
posted by Marcus Aurelius @ 8:34 PM
<< Home