English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

11 answers

We need to publicly finance campaigns, pure and simple. Make sure every candidate has access to the same amount of funds, the same amount of airtime, etc.

Then the people who give away billions of dollars to political parties, still wanting the tax break, would have to turn around and give that money to more worthy causes, like homelessness, and cancer research.

It's a win-win for society as a whole.

Will it ever happen? Doubtful. The richest do not want to give up the kind of influence and power that money provides under the current system.

2006-07-09 05:09:27 · answer #1 · answered by Bruin 2 · 0 0

Do you know George Sel-lars, or Mary Car-lson, or Frank No-el, or Peter Tom-son or Alice King-son?

Each one of these persons would make an excellent Senator or even a great President.

Unfortunately, none of these people have enough money to get the Newspaper, radio or TV businesses to tell you about them. And if you know nothing about these people will you vote for them?

So long as candidates need MONEY to pay for the services to publicize who they are, that is how long it will be before members of our government are no longer bought by Big Money.

Local town councilmen, state representatives, government Congress-folks and Presidents are all people who need MONEY to gain and stay in office.

Our Constitution gives people the Right to choose and support any candidate. That also means they have the Right to support them with Money. That's the hitch.

2006-07-16 11:24:46 · answer #2 · answered by Mr.Been there 3 · 0 0

The two may not be mutually exclusive. In fact, it may be BECAUSE they are good candidates that they have money in the first place. People will give money to candidates they believe in, candidates that they think are popular enough to have a good chance of winning. Without that support, money doesn't do much for a candidate- look at Steve Forbes, for example.

2006-07-09 12:08:04 · answer #3 · answered by timm1776 5 · 0 0

It cant work that way in America. To run, u hav to campaign to be known, and to campaign, u hav to hav money, and to hav money, u aren't going to understand what everyone else is going through. Hence, detatched leaders who set their own personal goals (like being re- elected). The only way to change is if people speak out, which they probably wont any time soon

2006-07-09 12:00:42 · answer #4 · answered by cinfull 3 · 0 0

Let's simply put it like this: it's the power and the lure of money are causing the elections to be _so_ boring. The best candidates who have the largest war chest (still talking about money) defeat the best ones with far less money. I see this as a form of corruption. "Money is the root of all evil," as the saying goes.

2006-07-09 12:06:07 · answer #5 · answered by brian 2010 7 · 0 0

Eliminate the Electoral College, and do a popular vote with a run off if there is more than one candidate. Stop corporate campaign contributions.

2006-07-09 12:02:45 · answer #6 · answered by kniggs 5 · 0 0

STATE Funding of election==a proposal given by Bharatiya Janata Party of INDIA. A a campain of * ONE VOTE ONE NOTE* However the people should be made conscience first not to go by the industrilist choice. USA is an example?

2006-07-09 12:00:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Get involved!!! Vote. Speak out for your candidate. Even after they are elected,hold them accountable for their promises and conduct. Be the change. Peace.

2006-07-09 12:21:44 · answer #8 · answered by wildrover 6 · 0 0

I don't know, but if you can figure this one out then you've solved the majority of the worlds problems.

2006-07-09 11:59:34 · answer #9 · answered by Jared H 3 · 0 0

put a woman in office

2006-07-09 11:58:58 · answer #10 · answered by olivia s. 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers