PAC money and Publically Funded Elections

My friends in the "Democratic Wing of the Democratic party" will not like this, but it needs to be said. PAC money is part of the problem of politics. Basically, just like money from private "big" donors, it is dished out to folks who dance to your tune, whether it is labor unions or Boss Tweed, it still is about buying influence.

The only answer that makes sense is for elections to be publicly funded. Arizona and Maine are two states that have adopted this and it works!

John J. Higgins reports that "traditional campaign finance reform sounds like such a remedy, but dig a little deeper and you find that reform laws have done nothing to address the dilemma of big money in politics or to boost voter turnout. All they have done is make an already inefficient and confusing system more inefficient and more confusing. Catching the bad guys is important, but without real alternatives there is no real remedy... The public funding method has changed politics in both Arizona and Maine for the better, so much so that Arizona is seeing a staggering 67 percent increase in voter turnout since its inception. Furthermore, the percentage of highest spenders winning elections has gone from 79 percent before public funding to just 2 percent since, showing without a doubt that public funding takes the power of money out of campaigning and returns it to the strength of ideas. More minorities and women are running and winning using public funding, because it naturally gives voice to populations and communities that have been underrepresented in the past. It has freed up lawmakers from the money-chase and has allowed them the opportunity to become better community advocates. In Maine, lawmakers have rolled back industry tax credits, created the most progressive prescription drug program in the country and are moving toward universal healthcare for all citizens."

States such as Hawaii, Rhode Island, Washington, and Connecticut are considering public funding measures. If we really want to democratize the system, we need to try to level the playing field. The requirements of a publicly financed system are still stringent enough to limit the "crackpot" factor--because it requires a genuine support of the candidate for the grassroots.

Is Dave Loebsack Really PAC Man?

From The Hill
Many Democratic freshmen raised tens of thousands of special-interest dollars toward their reelection even before they were sworn in for the 110th Congress.

The numbers show that although they said during their campaigns that they would reform the “culture of corruption” in Washington, many quickly immersed themselves in the town’s lobbyist-dominated fundraising network to fill up their coffers and retire their debt.

Rep. David Loebsack (D-Iowa), who surprised former Rep. Jim Leach (R), has already raised $71,000.

About $60,000 of that came from political committees such as the American Bankers Association PAC, which gave him $5,000 on Dec. 18, and the National Association of Realtors PAC, which also wrote him a $5,000 check the same day.

Loebsack accepted the money from these rival groups, which are well-known members of Washington’s lobbying culture, despite his calls to reform that culture only a few months ago.

“The most recent Republican ethics scandal involving Jack Abramoff only underscores the need to reform our political system to ensure that elected officials maintain the people’s trust in their government,” Loebsack wrote on his campaign website. “So long as Washington continues with politics as usual, few of the changes we as a nation need to move us forward are likely to occur.”

Gabby Adler, Loebsack’s spokeswoman, said that her boss would not let the influx of contributions affect his focus on constituents.

“Since winning in November Congressman Loebsack has received an outpouring of support from a wide range of supportive individuals and organizations in Iowa,” she said. “The congressman appreciates this support and is currently focusing his attention on serving the people of Iowa’s 2nd congressional district because their interests are his No. 1 priority.”

Setting aside contributions from fellow Democrats’ campaign accounts, Loebsack accepted less than $40,000 in PAC contributions between Oct. 1 and Election Day. His receipt of such funds has increased by about 50 percent since he won.