Getting elected to high office in the United States is no small task these days. Even for a lowly Congressman you can spend millions of dollars campaigning and for a Senate or Presidential run you are talking about 10’s of millions or now 100’s of millions of dollars. We are constantly hearing about how we spend way too much getting our politicians elected, and how we need to get the money out of politics. Let me give you a revelation. Politics is money. And money is politics. The two go together and are never going to be separated.
Today, one of a politician’s most important duties is fundraising. Without money to grease the skids and get the word out, that politician will not get elected. Which raises the issue of “Incumbency.” Incumbents want to limit the ability of their competition; hence, campaign finance reform. The most recent form is the McCain Feingold bill. The basic tenants of the bill limit how much an individual or corporation can give to a politician, and their Political Action Committee (PAC). This bill created a new creature called a 501C3.
The whole argument behind all of these laws is that they force the politician to go out and raise money from as many people as possible, as opposed to having one or two financial backers. In reality what it does is make it very hard to challenge the incumbent. Once a politician gets into office he or she can continue to raise money for the next election and they now have the power of the bully pulpit to talk about their programs and how they are helping their community. Special interest groups will petition the elected politician to vote certain ways on bills by making campaign contributions and asking their members to do likewise if said politician votes their way. I have nothing against special interest groups and I am a member of more than one and I believe in what they stand for (I will write about special interest groups later).
What I am against is limiting the amount of money an individual can contribute to any given politician. I say let the money flow and may the best politician win. Take off the limits and see who is best at getting their message out. If it is the incumbent, then they will raise the most money and get re-elected. But if it is a new-comer with fresh ideas who beats the incumbent fair and square or even just out spends them due to raw fund raising ability (As we saw with Obama) then so be it. I say get rid of all the laws that force politicians to form multiple PAC’s so that they can raise enough money to run for office. If a person has great ideas and a great message but no funding they are very unlikely to be elected. If that same person also has a political backer who is willing to finance them there is no reason why they should not be able to do that. The people who cry foul are the incumbents. The incumbents, who use their office to craft the laws to exclude such circumstances.
Now we have good laws on the books that allow the public to see who is donating to a particular politician and I think that practice should continue, but at the same time if I want to give 1 million dollars to my favorite politician as long as I disclose it, there should be no uproar. Except of course from the incumbents who will get their panties in a bunch and cry foul and that there is too much money in politics. No, the problem is that there is not enough money in politics. When the free market is allowed to flow the ideas and freedom of our great country will improve. When you limit ideas and entry into a particular market (i.e. Politics) you tear the country down and reduce our freedoms. God Bless America!
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
The right to keep and bear arms
As last Thursday’s ordeal reveals if just one soldier or officer had had a side arm in the building instead of reading about 13 dead men and women and 30 injured we would be reading about 5-6. I served in the U.S. Army from 1996 – 2000 and also spent 3 years in the National Guard. The men and women I worked, served and spent time with are the finest people in this great country. They are also some of the smartest and most capable I have ever known. At the time when I was on active duty I did worry about not having access to my issued firearm or even my personal owned weapon (POW). But looking back I see that as a monumental mistake on the part of the U.S. military in general, and myself specifically. We have one of the most disciplined and well trained fighting forces in the world and it just boggles my mind that these fine people are not able to defend themselves. The policy of a complete ban on all firearms except for military police forces on military reservations is criminal. Now that I am a civilian I have a concealed pistol license and carry every day. The same ought to be allowed and or required by our U.S. armed forces. Otherwise they are the U.S. Un-armed forces. How would we have tamed the wild-west if the U.S. Army had the firearm policy then that they do today? I will tell you right now that it would not have happened.
Nine times out of ten police officers and law enforcement officials arrive on the scene and clean up the mess. If the people involved at the time of whatever incident is happening have the ability to defend themselves then when the police do arrive they can clean up the bad guys mess and the innocent would-be victims will be safe. I pray to God every day that I will never have the need to draw my firearm in defense of myself or those around me, but I will never willing go un-armed anywhere again. There are those that would argue that my blatant “pro-gun” stance would invite more “Crimes of Passion,” than if the general populace is un-armed but just look at what is happening in England and Australia right now that they have total gun bans and the people who do defend themselves with firearms are prosecuted while the criminals get an apology. “I am so sorry that private citizen tried to defend themselves Mr. Mugger. Would you like a lollie-pop to make you feel better?” No it should be the other way around. The mugger goes to jail or the grave if they are dead and the victim (Who defended themselves) gets a pat on the back and a thank you card. We do not live in a kinder-gentler world. The only reason the U.S. and it’s allies have survived to the modern era is the willingness to use force if necessary to defend our freedom.
The 2nd amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the similar phrases in the state constitutions ensure that the tyranny of government over free men is held in check. Without the ability of private citizens to protect ourselves from acts of violence and naked oppression from our government we will lose all the other rights that are ordained us by are creator and written down in our declaration of independence and U.S. Constitution.
Nine times out of ten police officers and law enforcement officials arrive on the scene and clean up the mess. If the people involved at the time of whatever incident is happening have the ability to defend themselves then when the police do arrive they can clean up the bad guys mess and the innocent would-be victims will be safe. I pray to God every day that I will never have the need to draw my firearm in defense of myself or those around me, but I will never willing go un-armed anywhere again. There are those that would argue that my blatant “pro-gun” stance would invite more “Crimes of Passion,” than if the general populace is un-armed but just look at what is happening in England and Australia right now that they have total gun bans and the people who do defend themselves with firearms are prosecuted while the criminals get an apology. “I am so sorry that private citizen tried to defend themselves Mr. Mugger. Would you like a lollie-pop to make you feel better?” No it should be the other way around. The mugger goes to jail or the grave if they are dead and the victim (Who defended themselves) gets a pat on the back and a thank you card. We do not live in a kinder-gentler world. The only reason the U.S. and it’s allies have survived to the modern era is the willingness to use force if necessary to defend our freedom.
The 2nd amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the similar phrases in the state constitutions ensure that the tyranny of government over free men is held in check. Without the ability of private citizens to protect ourselves from acts of violence and naked oppression from our government we will lose all the other rights that are ordained us by are creator and written down in our declaration of independence and U.S. Constitution.
Monday, November 9, 2009
The end of our greatness
Long in coming has the vote last Saturday been. The masses who by and large do not pay taxes and therefore have no "Skin" in the game demanded that they get "Free" healthcare. Because of course it is a "Right." Do we not have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Well Saturday evening behind a veil of smoke and mirrors Congress passed the bill that takes away my liberty and my pursuit of happiness. All in the name of life. Well I say to you now, "Give me liberty or give me death!"
This is the most gross taking in U.S. history. It is time again fellow citizens to rise up and throw them all out of office. By that I mean vote against every incumbent regardless of party affilation. I know that this will not be an easy thing to do because "My" representatives really care for me! WRONG! the only thing my representatives care about is getting re-elected.
There are no term limits for Congress people and senators. Like wise there are none for the judicary. Only for the president. Why is that? Let's think back for a moment to when the constitution was ratified at the end of the 18th century. How long did the average person live back then? Into their 40's and 50's was the standard. Well now do to modern medicine people are living comfortably into thier 80's, 90's and 100+ years. That will all be changing with the passage of this bill.
We need to change the way our govnernment works in the only constitutionally approved way that really works best for "We, the People" We need a constitutional convention with a mandate of adding term limits to Congress and the Judicary. They imposed that on the office of the president because of FDR now it is time again to impose our will on Our government. Let's limit Congress to 12 years period. You can serve 2 terms in the senate, or 6 terms in the house or a combination of the 2 houses. The Judicary should also be limited to 15 years as a federal judge. But that is it. Life terms when the constitution was founded were a good idea then but now again with our longer lifespans the positions are being abused. In other words give up your power and let someone else have a go at running the country.
Now the 3 branches of government are separate and if someone wants to get elected or appointed in a separate branch of government after having been first in a different branch is fine. And of course if they would like to run for state or local office that is fine. But first they must give up the current office and the title to that office that they hold.
It is distressing to see more and more how once a person leaves office they still retain that title. Newt Gingrich is a prime example of this. He has been out of elected office for many years now but the talking heads on the news networks still refer to him as Mr. Speaker or Former Speaker. No! That is the beginning of Aristocracy! When you return to private life you are a private unelected citizen. The correct title for you then is Mr. or Mrs. or Miss or Ms. Not even "Your Honor."
To sum up they the "Elected officials" work for us. If we do not reign and check their power grabs they will take is all! Our best option is a constitutional convention.
God Bless America!
This is the most gross taking in U.S. history. It is time again fellow citizens to rise up and throw them all out of office. By that I mean vote against every incumbent regardless of party affilation. I know that this will not be an easy thing to do because "My" representatives really care for me! WRONG! the only thing my representatives care about is getting re-elected.
There are no term limits for Congress people and senators. Like wise there are none for the judicary. Only for the president. Why is that? Let's think back for a moment to when the constitution was ratified at the end of the 18th century. How long did the average person live back then? Into their 40's and 50's was the standard. Well now do to modern medicine people are living comfortably into thier 80's, 90's and 100+ years. That will all be changing with the passage of this bill.
We need to change the way our govnernment works in the only constitutionally approved way that really works best for "We, the People" We need a constitutional convention with a mandate of adding term limits to Congress and the Judicary. They imposed that on the office of the president because of FDR now it is time again to impose our will on Our government. Let's limit Congress to 12 years period. You can serve 2 terms in the senate, or 6 terms in the house or a combination of the 2 houses. The Judicary should also be limited to 15 years as a federal judge. But that is it. Life terms when the constitution was founded were a good idea then but now again with our longer lifespans the positions are being abused. In other words give up your power and let someone else have a go at running the country.
Now the 3 branches of government are separate and if someone wants to get elected or appointed in a separate branch of government after having been first in a different branch is fine. And of course if they would like to run for state or local office that is fine. But first they must give up the current office and the title to that office that they hold.
It is distressing to see more and more how once a person leaves office they still retain that title. Newt Gingrich is a prime example of this. He has been out of elected office for many years now but the talking heads on the news networks still refer to him as Mr. Speaker or Former Speaker. No! That is the beginning of Aristocracy! When you return to private life you are a private unelected citizen. The correct title for you then is Mr. or Mrs. or Miss or Ms. Not even "Your Honor."
To sum up they the "Elected officials" work for us. If we do not reign and check their power grabs they will take is all! Our best option is a constitutional convention.
God Bless America!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)