One of my previous posts, The Power of Money, focused on Congressional term limits and how they could offer some relief from the political influence of lobbyist groups. An even larger impact could be made by turning to a publically funded election process, banning large political contributions entirely.
If politicians continue to be forced to pursue lobbyist and corporate dollars in order to fund their re-election, then we’ll never have elected officials that are truly beholden to the people. Like the rest of us, they answer to who pays the bills. As representatives of the public, it stands to reason that the public should be our officials’ sole financiers instead of these special interest groups.
That is not to say that citizens shouldn’t be allowed to donate money to the candidate(s) of their choosing. They should. However those donations should be limited and they must truly be individual.
The Fair Elections Now Act was reintroduced this year in both the House and the Senate. While it doesn’t go to the extreme of mandatory public-only funding for federal elections that I am suggesting, it is an excellent step in that direction. It currently has 78 co-sponsors in the House and 13 in the Senate. All but two of those supporters are Democrats. It’s time we pressured both political parties to adopt this bill and get it pushed though in order to start driving the power back into the hands of the public and away from the lobbyists that currently compromise our elected officials via their financial clout.
You can learn more about this bill at http://fairelectionsnow.org/about-bill. You can also learn how to offer your own support via the Take Action tab on that site.
If you’re not yet convinced, here’s a pair of examples for you from the great state of Texas.
John Cornyn is a Republican Senator that holds several committee assignments and has been in office since 2002. Who are the top five industries that have combined to donate over $4M to his campaigns since 2007 including his top contributor, Exxon Mobile?
Law Firms, Oil & Gas, Retired, Health Professionals, and Real Estate
What is his voting record on energy related bills?
Voted YES on barring EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. (Apr 2011)
Open the Outer Continental Shelf for oil & gas leasing. (Jun 2008)
Voted NO on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jun 2007)
Voted NO on including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations. (Sep 2005)
Voted NO on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%). (Jun 2005)
Voted NO on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on Bush Administration Energy Policy. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010. (Jun 2003)
Drill in Alaska; oppose global warming treaties. (Jun 2002)
Randy Neugebauer is a Republican House Representative that sits on the Financial Services Committee and has been in office since 2003. Who are the top five industries that have combined to contribute almost $250K to his current campaign war chest?
Insurance, Commercial Banks, Finance/Credit Companies, Securities & Investments, and Real Estate
Guess which member of Congress has more money invested in Goldman Sachs than any other?
Randy Neugebauer with $550K.
Voted YES on terminating the Home Affordable mortgage Program. (Mar 2011)
Voted NO on letting shareholders vote on executive compensation. (Jul 2009)
Voted NO on modifying bankruptcy rules to avoid mortgage foreclosures. (Mar 2009)
Voted NO on regulating the subprime mortgage industry. (Nov 2007)
Voted NO on allowing stockholder voting on executive compensation. (Apr 2007)
Voted NO on protecting whistleblowers from employer recrimination. (Mar 2007)
Voted YES on restricting bankruptcy rules. (Jan 2004)
Would these two politicians have voted differently if they hadn’t received those financial contributions? We have no way of knowing for sure. But I’ll bet I’m not the only one that wonders.
No comments:
Post a Comment