Campaign.

[Phil]

Should there be a limit to how much each office is allowed to spend for a campaign? A price set for a national election, a price for a state election and a limit for county and so forth.

I would like to see that on 1 hand but then again there are problems with doing it that way. I do also believe that in a capitalist society you could then be able to use however much money you're able to raise.

There would be ways to circumvent limits too. If a commercial isn't paid for by the committee to elect John Miller to assembly it could be paid for by the makers of Brad Penn Oil, or Tops supermarkets.

I am sure that political leaders would find an angle like that to have ads and stay within the budget on a loop hole.

What does everybody else think?

[Jersey]

Basically Phil you're questioning whether or not there should be a standard, or "flat" amount, of money that can be spent on Campaign Finance. Currently, the states dictate through law the rules for state election campaigns, and the Federal Election Commission handles the federal campaigns, like Presidential elections.

To understand how it works, there are two types of money: hard and soft. Hard money is direct monetary donations to a campaign. Soft money is more along the lines of "expenditure" funds, which don't necessarily intend on leading a campaign in a certain direction while also not expressing the desire of defeat or success of a certain candidate. Soft money is simply under category "other".

For a time, Federal law did not allow corporations and unions to donate directly to a candidate for him to spend on his campaign. It would (and has) created biased donations. Meanwhile, most states still allowed for some types of corporate donations. It was overturned in January 2010, where it was cited as unconstitutional. Under the law, unions and large corporations were forced to use PACs, or political actions committees, to raise funds for donations to candidates. This behavior was considered bothersome, expensive, and tiring.

Incumbents constantly want to find new ways to restrict the campaign financing of their challengers. But their repeated attempts at this are usually stymied by the good ol' Constitution, which finds their attempts at stopping campaign finance unconstitutional.

To answer the question directly, there cannot be a limit to how much a candidate decides to spend. Congress knows that, so they unsuccessfully try and restrict who donates to which candidate. And it doesn't work because it violates Free Speech; any individual person and every large or small enterprise, including unions, can support whatever candidate they like.

Businesses usually go with Republicans because Democrat policies slap more red tape on them, restrict their hiring capabilities, force them to outsource, and impose employee racial and ethnic quotas on them. In essence, Democrats kill jobs, so businesses support Republicans. On the other side, unions overwhelmingly support Democrats because they support Union means of strong-arming businesses into obeying their agenda. This is usually done through funding and get-out-the-vote campaigns. Growth of government, another Democrat agenda cog, is another favored point of donation for unions because an overreaching and large government controlled by Democrats frequently employs union members only.

Basically, Free Speech disallows the restriction of funding, from both unions and businesses. Those are only two examples of potential donors, as there are many other. No matter the views of the donor (conservative or socialist), their right to donate to who they want is protected.

[Classicblast]

I see where you guys are going with this. I've thought about this too. A position that pays about 100 grand a year is then 400 K per term of office and there's 30 million spend on getting elected.

If I am understanding you guys correctly though hard money would be the commercials and everything the soft money would be staying in hotels as they campaign around and the traveling expenses.

I am sure no politician. I did belong to the baseball players union much of it was a ton of hogwash. While I am not generally pleased with what unions do I still believe they have their place.

[Phil]

Something like that. I can't express what I mean quite right. You're on track but yeah that's a good point the job doesn't even pay what they spend trying to get voted into it.

I realize these jobs are statusfull but a garbage job in a lot of ways too. You get the blame for things that are out of your control. And you fix 1 thing but it causes damage elsewhere and those effected hate you.

[Kimm]

Its not how much it costs to campaign or how much the job pays but what you can get when you have the position.

If you get yourself in those positions you have so much power its ridiculous. You can control things and even get things from other people such as favors and power you cant get any other way. Thats what theyre looking for because what rights they get in those jobs cant be gotten for any price. The contacts that can do things for them too cant be established by anybody outside the inner clique.

[Jason O'Lewa]

i know sometimes they buy the electeon
i dont understand when they run for jobs how they tell you things they know they cant even do even if they intend to get that done but voters believe them and then there disapointed if it doesnt happen

hello its not realistic

[Classicblast]

You're right Jason they do promise whatever they think you want to hear to vote for them.

[Phil]

The big election just 8 days away. At least the commercials for all these babblers will be over in just a week.

My father always says that its amazing there's any crime or taxes left after all these officials have done what they claim they have to reduce crime and taxes.

I'm Philip Ostrotkiewicz and I approve that message.

[Phil]

I thought of something else.

The big push is this week. I guess study shows that a number of people aren't thinking of voting and the last week is really the push to get participation from nonvoters who are registered.

I can buy that more now than before. I never thought of that but now I get it.

Previously I always thought the last week being the big push made little or no sense because by now most people know who they're going to vote for. On a November election I have usually known by about May who I'd vote for maybe ever sooner. Even in primaries when both parties have 4 or 5 people squaring off. I always know who I'd like to see get the position. If that person is not nominated but the ticket is narrowed to 2 or 3 I am able to pick 1 of those options before the final week.

I guess the final week being the big push is more understandable since they're really aiming for the registered voter who was thinking of not voting. In a horse race it could depend on the undecideds or unmotivated. Everybody else has their mind made up. I know I have never gone into a voting booth and changed my mind when I was clearly planning on voting for a candidate. In fact I've never been undecided this close to election day.

[Kimm]

I cant see how politicians are saying the recession is over when the whole county is suffering still. I dont know much about stock values and increases but when the people are having money problems greater than ever before thats a recession. When you cant afford things you used to afford, when jobs are lost at a rate faster than theyre being filled thats a recession.

[Blastgirl]

I am with a few Board Members who are looking forward to the Campaign stuff to be over.

[Phil]

The commercials will end around 7 or 8pm. Then We have 2 days for the news to flood it but that should be it until next year.

[fartinggurl]

I'm glad the election season is over. I get really sick of all the political ads, calls, and junk mail that comes during that time of year. I look at it as, if you call me one too many times, play your ad too many times, or send me too much junk mail, I'm going to vote for your opponent.

[Kimm]

I know we have some friends who are democrats here but I found this funny anyway.

[Phil]

Hey, its a PA plate too. Maybe its 1 of my neighbors.

[Classicblast]

I think its funny. Not just that I don't care for Obama but the effort someone went through to make that sign on the back of a truck is funny too.

[Jason O'Lewa]

I am tired of politicks anyway
the stores hire all these new people for chirstmas and then their temporary jobs but in january all the new comers are going to say that since they started unemployment is down

then in a few weeks the temporary jobs will be over with and their oponents will say next fall that employment slipped since they office changed hands you better elect our party this november

[Kimm]

Sure Jason they solved all your problems but its all behind the scenes when you really feel the benefit of their work is in year 5. Thats why its so important to reelect them.