There is a growing trend in major news outlets focus on the one dimensional horse-race and disregard issues of substance. This was made evident in the reporting on the end of first quarter fundraising for the 2008 Presidential race. Many major news papers chose to report on this topic as if fundraising was the sole indicator of a candidate's ability to win an election or to serve as president. Although money and fundraising is playing an increasingly important role in politics, which is shameful, the media should not neglect to report on other important issues and provide more context.
While major newspapers focus on the money chase and polling, some smaller papers go one step further and add more context to their stories. In response to the end of the first quarter of fundraising the Tampa Tribune had an article titled What to Make of Mega-Campaign Dollars. The article published by the Tampa Tribune ends with the line:
"More than the quarterly totals, voters want to know the ideology and political influence of a candidate's supporters."
This sums up perfectly how smaller media sources do a better job at reporting on the whole story.
There is currently legislation in the U.S. Congress to establish a public financing system for national congressional elections. Such a system would allow candidates to spend less time fundraising and more time communicating with their constituents. A public financing system would effectively make politicians more responsive and accountable to their constituents than special interests and wealthy campaign contributors.
A fellow Common Cause member recently spoke with Congressman Ciro Rodriguez (D-TX) from the 23rd District. When she asked him how he felt about public financing he voiced his support by saying "of course I'd support it." He also pointed out that with the current system politicians must devote so much time fundraising that they have very little time to talk with constituents.
It certainly is nice to hear that Congressman Rodriguez is in support of establishing such a system. Hopefully more of the Texas delegation will join with Congressman Rodriguez in support of establishing a public financing system for national congressional elections. Let's show the country that we have moved beyond the DeLay campaign finance scandals and support real reform.
On March 20th Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) introduced the Fair Elections Now Act into the U.S. Senate. On the same day, Representative John Tierney (D-MA) Introduced the Clean Money, Clean Elections bill in the U.S. House of Representatives. These bills were introduced on the fifth anniversary of the passage of the McCain-Feingold Bill.
This legislation would establish a public financing system for national congressional elections, effectively curbing the influence of wealthy contributors on congressional campaigns. This would provide candidates with public funds rather than having to rely on private donations from wealthy contributors. Candidates would be able to spend more time communicating with constituents and less time fundraising. Clean elections would also result in politicians who are more responsive to their constituents and a fair opportunity for any citizen to have a chance at running for office and being elected.
The Delay campaign finance scandal still hasn't faded from most of our memories, and passing Clean elections would help to finally put it to rest. It is ridiculous how much money candidates must raise in order to have a chance. I'd hate to spend so much time begging for money, or compromising my own beliefs because a contributor's support depended on it.
These bills are modeled after public financing systems in use at the state and local level across the country. Clean elections are already in use in Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Vermont, Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Portland, Oregon. Also, there is currently legislation to establish such a system in Maryland.
Money is playing an increasingly important role in politics today. For years the driving force and foundation of any candidate's campaign has rested not on his or her ideals, but on large contributions from special interest groups, lobbies, and wealthy campaign contributors. Often the winner is the candidate who is able to successfully raise the most money from these contributors, none of whom represent the diversity of the American public. Once in office, that politician feels obligated to protect the interests of the groups that put him there and undoubtedly loses sight of the constituents.
In mid March Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Representative John Tierney of Massachusetts will be introducing into the House and Senate, public financing bills that would effectively curb the influence of wealthy contributors on congressional campaigns. This would provide candidates with public funds rather than having relying on private donations from wealthy contributors. "Clean elections" would also result in politicians who are more responsive to their constituents and a fair opportunity for any citizen to have a chance at running for office and being elected.
In light of recent scandals both nationally and in the state of Texas it seems as though it is due time for this type of reform. According to non-partisan research, 75 percent of voters support clean elections, and only 16 percent oppose it, indicating that American voters seem to be ready for a public financing system. Americans tend to be keenly aware of the influence that big money has on getting individuals elected, and they don't like it.
