October 30, 2008
http://www.gallup.com/video/111628/Campaign-Finance-Americans-Radar.aspx
While I support Barack and his success, I do not believe we need nor we should support the change Barack chose to bring to his campaign last July. Do you remember his announcement that he was "declaring indepencence" from his past support for accepting matching funds from tax payers who chose to allocate on their IRS 1040 form $3. to go the presidential campaign fund. I'm hoping to believe that you and I can influence fellow tax payers to check that box on their federal income tax form to contribute to the public pool of campaign funds. This money is clean of special influences, available to willing and qualifying candidates for president, and limits the (excessive) spending of participating presidential candidates.
Vote for Barack, check that box on your 1040, and tell future pres. candidates (including Barack) you expect them to take that public money and spending limits!
Last month's manufactured uproar was about Obama's alleged flip-flop on public financing. I didn't write a blog post about this, but I commented on a couple of other blogs. Today, David Donnelly (Huffington Post) published an article on this that makes the key points with clearer facts. Take a read: $400 million for McCain: Who Broke Public Financing?
More...
Friends,
First Obama ditched public financing of campaigns, thereby dealing a deathblow to the idea. Then he meekly accepted the misguided Supreme Court ruling on the DC handgun ban. Now he's in favor of expanding 'faith-based' initiatives.
To clarify...Barack actually said yes to public financing. He decided to not take the government money and have his donors fuel his campaign…so let’s repeat that again…no government money…yes to the people funding his campaign. Kos mentioned the irony in the republican candidate needing government help but the democratic candidate declining government aid. So again…no to the government…yes to the people…now THAT’S public financing. Shoot ‘em a dub when you can…it’s OUR campaign.
Barack Obama has brought many new people into the political process, and he has reinvigorated the progressive souls of many who stopped participating. For a long-time pol like myself, it is easier to see the shifts and changes that Obama is exhibiting as normal progressions in a campaign. For the groups of people I mentioned at the start, changes in public financing or FISA feel like a betrayal, and it has shaken their faith. I am here to tell you not to jump ship or even put on your life vests. It is going to be alright.
I have to admit I had some mixed emotions when I got Barack's announcement last week that he was forgoing public financing. Part of me was happy. I had a sense of "it's on!" as finally, a Democrat has the resources to beat the Republicans at their own game.
But I also had a bit of sadness in hearing the decision. Here Barack has been such a proponent of public campaign financing, and even made some pretty strong-sounding promises that he would accept public financing. This decision is definitely a reversal, and it is definitely expedient. It would not have been possible if he weren't able to raise so much money. Of course nobody--not even Barack--would have imagined when he made those public financing promises that he would go on to raise the kind of funds that he has. It is a reminder to me and all of his supporters that while he is a high-minded, caring politician, he is still a politician.
I thought of an analogy with J.K. Rowling and the Harry Potter series. She started out writing Children's books, and the first two were quite popular with children. Then the books became much deeper and adult-oriented. All of a sudden, people of all ages all over the world were reading the books. It wasn't just children getting into reading, but adults--even non-readers like me: since I graduated from high school 14 years ago, I have read and finished 7 books for pleasure. Yes, the seven Harry Potter books. The success of the books continued to grow at an unimaginably wild pace. Then the much-anticipated book seven arrives, and how does the series end? With a cheesy, predictable, "happily ever after" Epilogue. My brother Paul commented that he realized at the end, "Oh right, they're children's books." But that underwhelming ending does not take away from the impact of the Harry Potter series.
The Obama campaign is similar. His rejection of public financing is a reminder, "Oh right, he's a politician, he needs to win elections." But this ultimately does not take away from the historic impact of his candidacy and his campaign.
Last month, I went to the Pima county Green Party meeting to make the argument for Obama based solely on the Green Party's own "10 core values." I got a mixed response that was mostly disappointing. It seems that they are so idealistic and unwilling to compromise that there is maybe even an underlying belief that anyone who wins has somehow sold out their principles. Some Green party members made arguments that sounded like one of their core values was *not winning elections.* Barack Obama is not this idealistic. He knows that in order to make real change, some compromises will have to be made. This is one of them.
And by the way, I'm only a few pages from finishing my eighth post-high school pleasure book: Dreams From My Father, by Barack Obama.
(Yes, I'm a little late writing about this relatively old issue, but it took me a while to get around to writing it and computer problems delayed it even more. But here we go.)
When it comes to making choices, I am a very indecisive person. The logical side of me takes in the arguments from every angle and I can't choose until I've weighed every option. I go through this process when I choose what to eat, and when I choose issues to support and people to vote for. Last week Barack Obama caused a tremendous amount of controversy when he announced that he would forgo campaign financing and rely on the millions of private donors who have already given and who he plans to solicit in the future. Many questioned his character because he backed down on his word to work with the Republican candidate to use public financing. I'm going to discuss both of these positions here.
First, the affirmative: Barack Obama has created an unprecedented grassroots campaign that has inspired millions to give what they can to support him. This decision will employ the truest form of public financing. In the end, the benefits from amount of money he will raise will far outweigh the problems the decision will create. Besides, Obama will need all the help he can get to fight the Republican money machine.
Now, the opposition: Obama did say that he would put effort in to work with the Republican candidate to use the public finance system that he strove to reform. Calling getting funds from millions of people "public financing" is really just skewing the fact that it's just many private donors giving to a cause. Obama really did go back on his word, and that is the mark of a politician willing to do what it takes to win, despite going against earlier promises. Plus, even though it may still be a formidable opponent, the Republican money machine isn't as strong as it used to be and John McCain isn't being received as well by the more right-wing organizations as Bush and other Republicans have been.
Now, honestly, I agree more with the right than the left on this issue. Obama did go back on his word, he's stretching the definition of "public financing," and this is a case of doing whatever it takes to win. But really, Obama didn't sign a contract to take public financing, today's reality is different from a year ago, and he will be stronger in the fall because of this decision. Even though I wrote more for the opposition on this issue, this minor question of character isn't enough to make me want to give my first vote to John McCain in November. But it's something to think about when I vote for Barack Obama.
In 2004.
It's been really hard to listen to all the harsh criticisms coming from Republicans, and some Democrats, over the last few days about Senator Obama's decision to opt out of public financing. The truth is his campaign is publically financed, just in a different way. And pardon my naked ambition, but I WANT THIS MAN TO WIN. There's nothing illegal or unethical about him doing his own fundraising. That's why he's allowed to "opt out." It's an "option." It's a legal choice. Just because no one else ever has, only speaks to how different his campaign is.
I realize most of the fuss has been about the change in his position, but what he said was that if he became the nominee, he "would aggressively pursue an agreement" to preserve public financing with the Republican nominee. He did not promise to commit political suicide to keep from changing his mind.
And speaking of changing his mind, here's Senator McCain in 2004 on the positives of internet campaign contributions:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/06/8763_mccain_hypocris.html
Barack Obama has been taking repeated hits in the last several days since he announced that he would not take public financing. Why is it that Joe Biden on Meet the Press and the other Obama surrogates on the June 22 Sunday morning talk shows did not respond at all by pointing out how McCain has flip-flopped on this issue himself and that it is hypocritical for McCain to denounce Obama for reversing course on this issue?
Either Biden is asleep or, more likely since I don't think any of the surrogates today pointed this out, the Obama campaign has affirmatively decided not to point out McCain's reversal of position on this issue and so instructed the surrogates. WHY???
McCain himself is at this moment breaking the law in continuing to spend over the spending limits he promised to abide by through the primary season in exchange for public financing. (By the FEC's rules, we're still in the primary phase of the election and will be until the conventions.) McCain opted into public financing last fall, accepted the spending limits and then profited from that opt-in by securing a campaign-saving loan. And then he used some clever, but not clever enough lawyering, to opt back out. And the person charged with saying what flies and what doesn't -- the Republican head of the FEC -- said he's not allowed to do that. He can't opt out unilaterally unless the FEC says he can.
Why not make this a HUGE issue when defending Obama the last few days???
If the Obama campaign and the surrogates came out hard (or at all) on this point when defending Obama then the media would have to report that both McCain and Obama flip-flopped on this issue and Obama would not have to take all the criticism.
I just don't understand why the Obama campaign doesn't punch back hard sometimes on issues like these and why they choose instead to give McCain a pass.
The media is lazy and they don't bring up McCain's hypocrisy -- but then why should they if the Obama campaign doesn't think that it is important enough to bring it up and point out McCain's hypocrisy on this issue. GEEZ--I'm scratching my head here! Wake up, people!
--Jim
IMHO, one of the main reasons Obama cannot go the public financing route is that he has to combat the MSM which fell in love with McCain in 2000. Here are some tid bits from an article Jake Tapper, ABC's political reporter, wrote January 31, 2000. Does he still think McCain is a "cool dude"? (Read entire article here). For more detail on the media's love for John McCain, The Nation has published an article, Loving John McCain, for its July 7th issue.
And, perhaps worst of all, McCain is beloved by the media. And it is not an unreciprocated love.He pokes fun at his own media pandering...And we love it. Not just because he's accessible and generally straightforward (or at least forthright about his evasiveness). Or because he's a war hero, or because he knows more about foreign policy than most of us could ever know. B ut because he's basically just a cool dude and a nice, friendly guy and that, among the current crop of both Republicans and Democrats, makes him unique...Afterward, on his "Straight Talk Express" campaign bus, I asked McCain if the "Not ready for prime time" charge didn't violate his pledge not to go negative. "It certainly approaches it," he acknowledged, grinning, charming the two dozen or so reporters hanging on his every word. He laughed with a twinkle in his eye.Even when he's admitting his own hypocrisy, you can't help but like John McCain.
And, perhaps worst of all, McCain is beloved by the media. And it is not an unreciprocated love.
He pokes fun at his own media pandering...
And we love it.
Not just because he's accessible and generally straightforward (or at least forthright about his evasiveness). Or because he's a war hero, or because he knows more about foreign policy than most of us could ever know. B ut because he's basically just a cool dude and a nice, friendly guy and that, among the current crop of both Republicans and Democrats, makes him unique...
Afterward, on his "Straight Talk Express" campaign bus, I asked McCain if the "Not ready for prime time" charge didn't violate his pledge not to go negative.
"It certainly approaches it," he acknowledged, grinning, charming the two dozen or so reporters hanging on his every word. He laughed with a twinkle in his eye.
Even when he's admitting his own hypocrisy, you can't help but like John McCain.
Today, I made my first contribution to the Obama campaign since the end of the primaries. I had been planning to do so for some time, and decided to do so now... in spite of the decision to opt out of public financing. I have to say, I felt like I was biting the bullet for the first time since I started making contributions to the campaign with an initial $100 on New Year’s Day as a Resolution to do something constructive to create a better world.
When I set up my profile on my.barackobama.com , I hesitated to tick the ethics box in the list of issues that I care about. With so much else going on – illegal and immoral wars started by a country I love, a long-since unkept promise to provide all Americans with health care coverage, a dismally deficient education system in which America is falling behind its competitors, a “challenge of our time” to actually make the hard choices that will be necessary to tackle global warming instead of our leaders burying their heads in the sand – there almost seemed to be little room to be passionate about ethics and campaign finance reform. I remain as concerned as ever about the other issues, but have found myself increasingly concerned about these last two as this truly historic campaign year of 2008 unfolds. Today I ticked the “electoral reform” box in the long list of issues I care about, adding that to “good government / ethics” and all the others I ticked off a long time ago.
I watched Obama’s video about his decision and was left just convinced enough to bite that bullet and give another $50, added to the other contributions I’ve made. I’m one of those hundreds of thousands of Americans who give money in dribs and drabs, but as much as we can afford. Living in Madrid, Spain, I have had a somewhat different experience from most Americans, but there have been campaign events here, too, in support of Obama, which I have attended. Also, Obama’s candidacy more than anything else prompted me to join Democrats Abroad and vote in their global primary back in February. I’ve made an approximately $50 contribution to that organization with gratitude for organizing the primary which made it so much easier for us voters overseas to participate in the primary process, and now, through events like the Obama Bridge Span project, in the challenge presented by John McCain and the need to bring real Change to Washington, our country and our world.
I have been an enthusiastic supporter of Barack Obama and hope to continue to be through November and beyond to an Obama administration starting on January 20, 2009. As someone living abroad, take it from me – the world can hardly wait for that glorious day to come – to put the lies, corruption and flat-out wrong-headed policies of Bush/Cheney into the history books as a lesson we must never repeat.
All that being said, I am troubled by Barack Obama’s decision to jump the public financing ship. I post my concerns here today in the hopes that other folks will express their opinions and that some of them will satisfy my doubts about the decision Barack Obama has taken on this issue. As bad as the policies of the Bush Administration have been for America and America’s role in the world, the outright deceit of the American people may stand as it’s worst legacy. I still believe Barack Obama when he says he wants to change Washington, but his reneging on his commitment to follow the public financing rules or at least to come to some agreement about how to proceed with John McCain raises a red flag for me as an Obama supporter. I’ve tuned into various sources and heard a range of opinions, but to give you just one of those sources, I refer you to the discussion between Mark Shields and David Brooks on the Online News Hour ( http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ ) as one example.
Please, if you read this article and have an opinion about the Obama campaign’s decision to opt out of public financing, take a moment to share your views and respond. I really want to know what other Obama supporters think, and to know if they have the same doubts I do. I still want Barack Obama’s candidacy and, hopefully, presidency, to be “CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN”.
I think the true rationale for declining the public financing system provided for by the government is in reality couched in - and therefore ironically true to - the supposed purpose of that system, to level the playing field. But Obama has levelled the playing field using old grassroots savvy married to new internet savvy and his campaign IS publicly financed by WE THE PEOPLE already. To hamstring himself financially to an amount arbitrarily (?) determined by the government and sacrifice an EARNED ADVANTAGE of his campaign would betray the grassroots he has organized.
The system also begs the question of being genuinely democratic - how many of us know if or if not, or why or why not, that money could go to, say, a third Party candidate?
The intent of Public Financing Laws is to diminish the power of big donations over our government.
Barack Obama's campaign has found a better way to accomplish the same goal: getting millions of small donations from individual contributors. It may not be good politics to opt out of public financing, but make no mistake - the powers that are used to buying access are being shut out and it will make them very nervous.
Obama said he would agree to public financing IF a deal could be reached with the Republicans regarding 527 groups and party support—that didn’t happen.
Incidentally, when McCain was struggling during the primary season he told the FEC he would agree to public matching funds—the promise of those funds allowed him to secure loans which kept his campaign afloat.
Then when McCain started doing well and contributions came pouring in, he reneged on his promise to the FEC—even though the Republican head of the FEC said McCain could not do so.
The only reason the FEC hasn’t taken action is it has four empty seats (not enough for a quorum) and the Republicans in Congress are holding up appointments to fill those seats in order to keep the FEC from taking action against McCain.
For the Republicans to criticize Obama on this issue his flat-out hypocritical.
