Sunday Morning Coffee - Aug 1: Campaign finance
by Sunday Morning Coffee | Aug 1, 2010 10:50am
(5) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Election 2010, Opinion, Podcast
This week the guys bring a new guest and discuss campaign finance and free speech, and the guy who tried to rob a bank wearing clown pants, fake breasts, and a blond wig. Click below to listen.
(5) Comments
posted by: erikblaz | August 1, 2010 9:44pm
Brian, I totally agree with you about the free speech crap. The supreme court was probably bought off.
Lobby money is what is fundamentally wrong with our political system. Corporations purchase legislation and as a result this country is NOT run by the people it is run by the corporations. Some radio hosts will tell you that these corporations are run by people who operate in their own best interests which in turn operates the corporation in its own best interest and eventually in the peoples best interest, but unfortunately the individual running the corporation’s personal best interest do not always align with the masses. I hate that it is this way, but it is.
posted by: erikblaz | August 1, 2010 9:48pm
Furthermore, I agree 100% that many 3rd world countries are not ready for democracy. I have thought about this a lot when we were trying to set up democracy in IRAQ. These people can’t handle it. Are we going to do that same thing in Afghanistan? They can’t handle democracy.
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | August 1, 2010 11:12pm
Among the problems with equal financing is the incumbent advantage.
What are the goals of campaign reform? Increased representation of third parties? Level funding? Denying Corporations from contributing?
If it’s to level the field to increase representation than a convincing argument could be made for giving challengers more money than incumbents and third party challengers even more. Eventually a formula would be derived based on election results as to the amount of money that overcomes either a major party advantage or incumbent advantage.
I don’t like the Citizen’s United decision but I accept it because the manner of circumventing finance laws on the internet are legion. It’s become like the hydra where every election there’s a new level of lobbying abuse by proxy.
Back to square one. Rather than cutting heads off the hydra it’s time to give candidates a financial base, guaranteed media space, and required debates and forum participation.
Beyond the base requirements and funding let them spend freely. Freakonomics has studies on the effect of unpopular candidates spending ridiculous sums and for the most part its completely ineffective.
In other words if the public doesn’t like you or your message the diminishing returns from increased exposure is a fairly steep curve of financial futility (throwing good money after bad so to speak).
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | August 1, 2010 11:28pm
Gordon Gecko returns in Wall Street II on September 24th.
This time around he plays a cross between Peter Schiff and Michael Milken after his jail term.
It’s impossible to talk about outrages in business. I’ve worked for Harvard educated retail management who knew from the minute they walked in the door of a small regional firm that they were going to over expand on vendor credit and drive the firm into bankruptcy and ongoing chapter 11 sales. They would have their money out in 18 months and pillage for the next 4 years in bloated salaries and by owning over paid back office related companies for advertising, purchasing, payroll, etc. If they could sub it out to themselves they’d do it. Purchase the prime Real Estate locations or strip malls and lease it back at above market rates, etc.
6 stores become 60 and then become nothing in 6 years. There’s a new angle every five years. LBOs, etc.
