Reform This!

 

      There is a common belief that having the most money is a clear indicator of a candidate's ability to win an election.  The one with the most money wins.  Well, that's not really true because at some point all the money in the world won't make a difference.  It is clear though that a well-financed candidate can more easily beat a poorly financed one.  If one candidate has the ability to spread his name to most of the voters and the other remains unknown, then it seems obvious what the outcome will be.  When the voter enters the polling place he may only know one name and the chances are he will vote for the name he knows.

 

      The problem is that the well-funded candidate may be backed by a few rich men or groups that will, because of the money, be able to exert undue influence on the candidate after he is elected.  The idea of campaign finance reform is to eliminate this possibility by providing equivalent public funds to each candidate and severely restricting or totally eliminating large contributions by influential individuals or groups.

 

      I agree with campaign finance reform and so does Barack Obama.  The conventional thinking for many years was that the only way to collect enough money for public funding was for the government to raise it from the public and split it between the candidates.  Taxpayers had a choice to contribute to the Presidential Election fund when they pay their taxes.  But in the last few years a new technology called the Internet grew up and matured.  The Obama Campaign has used it to its greatest extent.  They have raised hundreds of millions of dollars from one and a half million donors, the great percentage of which contributed less than one hundred dollars.  By limiting the amount of money that can be contributed by any individual, this has become new way to eliminate the influence of big donors and the potential influence on a candidate's policies without having the government involved at all.

 

      Did Obama go back on his pledge to work out a deal with McCain and to only use public funding?  Yes.  But Obama did not go back on the spirit of the pledge?  No.  His is not taking money from lobbyists and PACs, instead he is taking money from the public in a different way, a way that Republicans and others have argued for years is a true form of free speech; monetary contributions by American citizens, limited by campaign reform laws.  This is just one more way that the Internet is making the world better for all of us.

 

      In the future, we may be able to eliminate going to the polling place all together by holding elections on the internet.  People fear this because of the obvious possibilities of fraud.  I believe that if many people like me have no fear of buying products on-line and banking on line, then voting on-line seems inevitable.  All eligible voters have a social security number which is unique to every person.  It doesn't take a stretch of the imagination to believe this could be useful in an internet election.

______________________________________________________

Ric's Blogs          All Blogs          Ric's Web Site

______________________________________________________

Constructive comments welcome at ric@ricsweb.com

© 1989 - 2008  Ricsweb - All Rights Reserved