|
Tuesday, 22 August 2006 18:52 |
 | | Carl S. Milsted, Jr. |
A couple of weeks ago I received an e-mail inviting people to a reception with Rep. Charles Taylor, R-Brevard. To attend, an individual must first contribute at least $500 to Taylorës campaign ÇƒÓ $1,000 for a couple.
Buying access to your congressman ... this doesnët sit too well with many. For this reason we have Byzantine campaign finance regulations which trample upon our freedom of speech and press, and some are calling for even stricter regulations which are in obvious defiance of the First Amendment ÇƒÓ all to fight against this kind of borderline corruption.
Unfortunately, most campaign finance reformers overlook the bigger source of corrupt campaign finances: pork-barrel spending.
About a week
after receiving the aforementioned e-mail, I received a four-color,
six-page spread from the U.S. House of Representatives, advertising how
much pork Charles Taylor has brought to Western North Carolina ÇƒÏ a
minimum $90 million worth (only half of the items had a price tag; thus
the actual dollar figure could be far higher). So, Mr. Taylor is buying
votes using our increasingly bankrupt U.S. Treasury, and using Treasury
funds to advertise the fact.
It may sound
like I am singling out Mr. Taylor. Iëm not. I may well vote for the man
unless his opponent says something I really like. My beef is with the
system. Similar borderline bribery and vote buying is going on around
the country in virtually every congressional district.
Current campaign
finance law and most proposed reforms ÇƒÓ including total spending caps
and public financing ÇƒÓ fail to address the underlying problem. In fact,
many make the problem worse!
Any effective
campaign finance reform must explicitly address the power of
incumbency. Incumbents can spend taxpayer dollars as a means to
campaign, and can solicit funds for the privilege of access, which
leads to tax loopholes, corporate welfare and restrictions on trade.
To remedy this situation, I suggest several possible moderate reforms:
1. Individual contribution limits to challengers should be at least twice as high as those to incumbents.
2. Taxpayer-funded mailings from congresscritters should cease immediately.
3. Loans to
campaigns must be retired before the term of office begins. (A wealthy
candidate can loan thousands to his campaign and raise the money to pay
off the loan later. This makes sense as many contributions come in
late. However, money received to pay off such a loan can go straight
into the politicianës pocket. If the politician is holding office, this
is legalized bribery.)
4. Campaign
accounts should not be allowed to carry over funds between elections.
This includes funds raised for the primary. The current system allows
incumbents (who are rarely challenged during the primary season) to
raise primary monies to spend in the general election.
5. Campaign committees should not be allowed to donate to other campaign committees.
Do these things and we will start having real campaigns each election cycle. Voting might be worth the bother.
But note that I
said that the above reforms are moderate. If we really wanted to make
campaigns interesting, we could go further:
1. Have term
limits with teeth: no re-elections whatsoever! If you are holding
office, you cannot run for office or solicit campaign contributions
until your term is over. To run for multiple congressional terms, you
must spend a couple of years as a private citizen between terms.
2. Cut back on
the gerrymandering. Demand that congressional districts follow county
and city borders to the greatest extent possible.
3. Use approval
voting. Our current "first past the post" system narrows choices down
to two long before Election Day. Approval voting allows a rational
choice between more than two candidates at a time.
ï
Carl S. Milsted Jr. is chairman of the Libertarian Party of Buncombe County.
|
