Opinion Talk

By E. Lewis

January 13, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

No and for the most part I blame we the voters.

In order to get elected to national and most state offices, it takes a lot of money. So much money is required, because it costs so much to run a campaign that gives any politician a fighting chance at getting elected. How is a politician going to get his/her word out unless they buy air time on television which is very expensive? Then of course, politicians also have to spend time fighting negative and often erroneous information put out by opposing candidates and parties. Negative campaigning has become such a part of politics because it works. Voters might complain about it, but not enough of us do even the most basic research into candidates and their records and in the end negative campaigns work. Quite often votes will be based on smear campaigns like the Swift Boats Ads attacking the war record of a triple Purple Heart awarded John Kerry, the patriotism of combat triple amputee Max Cleland or push polling implying that John McCain has a mentally unbalanced wife and fathered an illegitimate black baby.

As long as huge sums of $$$ are required to “buy” our votes Congress will never be able to separate itself from lobbyist.

Some have suggested that term limits are the answer. The last time I checked we the voters are the ones who vote these candidates into office and it is we the voters who vote in the incumbent.

By rob ferguson

January 13, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

I would like to think so, but this boil will never be removed form the backside of the US political system due to greed. Bribery anyone?

By Bill D.

January 13, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

You don’t want to separate government and lobbying. The trick is to regulate abuse by enforcing strict regulations on the flow of money and influence. But controlling abuse just isn’t the IN thing these days.

Newt infers “it will not be denied…,â€? accusing government itself of being the real conspirator - not the criminal abusing it. His “she was just asking for it” type of opinion makes it sound like Newt really misses the Congress he left in disgrace. So, why would he pooh pooh the Abramoff scandal and blame it on the Democrats (and seemingly ineffectual Republicans) for maintaining a serviceable government? Now, that’s a real head scratcher.

Of course, AJC forgot to remind us that Newt is a lobbyist. Excuse me, a Washington-based “government relations� consultant with the Gingrich Group. Hush! We don’t want to say LOBBYIST any more!

By Van

January 14, 2006 08:18 PM | Link to this

The reason it costs so much to get elected is because there is so much money available from either a Soros or some Texan with deep pockets.

If one side throws 10 miliion into the pot, the other side must match it - at least. With the recent campaign finance reform bills, the people have less opportunity. The reform let the rich funnel more money into the candidates through various means and limits the people to $2,000.

Getting the lobbyists out of politics is like getting the water out of the ocean; we are not ever going to do it, and Congress will never pass real restrictions.

By Brian Curtis

January 15, 2006 06:05 PM | Link to this

The problem is intricate enough that no single change — like campaign-finance reform, or prosecuting bribery — will eliminate it.

There’s some validity to a “blame the voters” attitude … but even there, keep in mind that our system is rigged in favor of two (and ONLY two) parties, that every candidate is processed by the respective “machines,” that debate rules bar any real discussion or alternative viewpoints, that TV coverage is the only option for electoral success, that gerrymandered districts can ensure a 95 percent or higher re-election rate, that the electoral college and winner-take-all voting system nullifies conscientious third parties and runoffs, and that voting machines are eminently corruptible and impossible to trace or verify.

In other words, we’ve got a whole corrupt, unworkable, and heavily stacked system to deal with here. Lobbying is only one part of a gigantically broken whole. Is it any wonder our voter participation rates are so low?

By Dave

January 17, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this

Eliminate the need for campaign money and you eliminate the impact of lobbyists. Ban ALL political advertisements.