by yellowdem1129, Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:11:30 PM EST
Full disclosure: I am constantly trying to convince my fellow democratic party members to advocate freedom rather than government regulation as much as possible. Thefore I don't support any restrictions on campaign donations from American citizens. I urge full disclosure in a timely manner.
Yet, many in our party, especially those on the HARD left want Public financing of political elections. It is my understanding that BOTH Senators support Public financing over a private system.
Yet, if we had Public financing in this Primary, Barack Obama would not have a chance to win. And that would be bad.
Barack Obama is on the verge of being the democratic frontrunner for 1 reason alone. No it's not the unprecedented media coverage.
It is his MONEY ADVANTAGE.
Senator Obama and Senator Clinton both have raised enormous sums of money, BUT where Senator Obama outpaces her is in NEW DONORS and the facts will show it will turn out mostly to be thousands of AFRICAN AMERICANS giving in small amounts that is the difference.
This has allowed him to organize in every caucus and Primary state, whereas Clinton has had to husband her resources for the "important" states. Kansas, Nebraska, Idaho, Alaska, etc. are all places where money trumps all. The end result is that Senator Obama has put together all of the states that no one focused on and has neutralized big losses in key states like California, New Jersey, and elsewhere.
If everyone had an equal amount of money, he wouldn't have been able to do this and would be well behind at this point.
THIS WAS THE CLINTON TEAM'S CALCULATION.
If you don't believe me, subtract all of the delegates from uncontested states. They were uncontested because of the money advantage Obama has.
One more example of why our system doesn't make sense:
Oprah is prohibited from giving Obama $2 million.
Caroline Kennedy and her family can't give Obama $3 million.
Maria Shriver can't give Obama $500,000.
But that is what they actually did, by endorsing him at the right time, in the proper venues.
If you think those figures are over-blown, ask yourself what would Obama rather have, a $2 million donation from Oprah, or a 4 state tour with the Queen of daytime talk, complete with wall to wall media coverage?
So it is wrong to limit an unknown donor from giving $1 million donation, while Oprah did just that by being herself.
Lastly, the media clearly has an agenda in both Primaries. They wanted McCain and Obama. The stories they choose to tell, questions they ask/don't ask. The speeches they run for free. The pictures they place on the front page. All of these are influencing the process. They are all worth millions of dollars.
So the idea that we can have some Public Financing system is a bad one. We need to go the other way. Let everyone speak as they want to. Money, whether from 100,000 small donors or 1 big donor is not corrupting. People are either honest or corrupt.
Senator Obama would be an also ran if he had to work within a public financing system.
Then none of this excitement would have ever happened.
And then who would Hillary pick for her V.P.?