Senate race shows campaign reform needed
You’ve heard the old saw about America having the best politicians money can
buy. That’s never been truer with today’s political action committees pouring
millions of dollars into political campaigns.
There’s a ton of outside money going into both sides of Arkansas’ Senate race from donors who could care less about Arkansas. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, outside groups have spent about $7.5 million on the race between Sen. Mark Pryor and Rep. Tom Cotton.
It compared in-state fundraising to out-of-state fundraising and reported that while both had similar amounts of outside contributions, 70 percent of Cotton’s total donations came from outside Arkansas while Pryor had received 57 percent of his from outside the state. This is one of the top five U.S. Senate races getting outside funding from super PACs and tax-exempt nonprofit organizations. The others are Massachusetts, Kentucky, Mississippi and North Carolina.
Conservative PACs and organizations really have poured the money into Arkansas with 18 of them contributing to Cotton while Pryor has received funding from five liberal PACs and groups.
Sadly, this is the state of politics where money speaks louder than people’s voices. Those outside donors aren’t interested in Arkansas or Arkansans, just in having a vote in the Senate for their interests. Voters are just minor cogs in the election wheel. Instead of campaigns based on issues and candidates doing their best to convince people why they’re best to represent Arkansas, these groups give us loud, slick TV commercials hammering buzz words and national talking points into voters’ heads. It’s based on the premise if you tell people something over and over for long enough, they’ll believe it.
We’re not a wealthy state by any means, so it’s relatively easy for these groups to dominate the campaigns and, in the end, make the winner beholden to them. In a sense, it’s not a whole lot different than when the carpetbaggers came into Arkansas during Reconstruction.
We have reached a point where campaign spending is ridiculous. It’s gotten so that unless you’re a millionaire or curry the favor of millionaires you can’t afford to run for higher office. In 2012, the average spending to win a U.S. Senate seat was $10.3 million, according to the Sunlight Foundation. It cost $1.6 million to win a spot in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Each election cycle it costs more and more to be a candidate, largely because PACs and special interests try to outspend one another in forwarding their agendas. In the long run, the people come out on the short end of the stick.
Campaign finance reform needs to be addressed seriously, although it’s an uphill battle. Those PACs and special interests aren’t going to back down from a proven way of pushing their interests ahead of the people’s.
In this country, folks are fond of saying they want a level playing field so everyone can have an equal chance. Obviously, that philosophy is more lip service than reality in times when the country’s following the Golden Rule: Those who have the gold make the rules.
That needs to change, and the playing field does, indeed, need to be leveled so the people’s interests become dominant, not those of special interests. We do not need our elections to be auctions with candidates and offices going to the highest bidders.
It’s time for the people to make campaign finance reform an issue, to press candidates for not only their positions but for what they will do to help bring about reform. There needs to be a campaign spending ceiling, a limit on how much candidates can spend in campaigns, as much as there needs to be a tighter limit on contributions candidates can receive.
The seemingly endless flow of cash from special interests should be curbed, and there needs to be a more public accounting of where money comes from so we can put an end to “dark” money politics. Anyone who contributes to a candidate or a PAC, political group, committee or even a coffee klatch supporting a candidate needs to be publicly identified so voters know just who is backing him.
We in Arkansas need to know everyone who is pouring money into the U.S. Senate campaign and any other political campaign within the state because those elected represent Arkansans, not the special interests. Campaign finance reform could do that.
The people’s voice needs to speak louder than special interests’ money.
There’s a ton of outside money going into both sides of Arkansas’ Senate race from donors who could care less about Arkansas. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, outside groups have spent about $7.5 million on the race between Sen. Mark Pryor and Rep. Tom Cotton.
It compared in-state fundraising to out-of-state fundraising and reported that while both had similar amounts of outside contributions, 70 percent of Cotton’s total donations came from outside Arkansas while Pryor had received 57 percent of his from outside the state. This is one of the top five U.S. Senate races getting outside funding from super PACs and tax-exempt nonprofit organizations. The others are Massachusetts, Kentucky, Mississippi and North Carolina.
Conservative PACs and organizations really have poured the money into Arkansas with 18 of them contributing to Cotton while Pryor has received funding from five liberal PACs and groups.
Sadly, this is the state of politics where money speaks louder than people’s voices. Those outside donors aren’t interested in Arkansas or Arkansans, just in having a vote in the Senate for their interests. Voters are just minor cogs in the election wheel. Instead of campaigns based on issues and candidates doing their best to convince people why they’re best to represent Arkansas, these groups give us loud, slick TV commercials hammering buzz words and national talking points into voters’ heads. It’s based on the premise if you tell people something over and over for long enough, they’ll believe it.
We’re not a wealthy state by any means, so it’s relatively easy for these groups to dominate the campaigns and, in the end, make the winner beholden to them. In a sense, it’s not a whole lot different than when the carpetbaggers came into Arkansas during Reconstruction.
We have reached a point where campaign spending is ridiculous. It’s gotten so that unless you’re a millionaire or curry the favor of millionaires you can’t afford to run for higher office. In 2012, the average spending to win a U.S. Senate seat was $10.3 million, according to the Sunlight Foundation. It cost $1.6 million to win a spot in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Each election cycle it costs more and more to be a candidate, largely because PACs and special interests try to outspend one another in forwarding their agendas. In the long run, the people come out on the short end of the stick.
Campaign finance reform needs to be addressed seriously, although it’s an uphill battle. Those PACs and special interests aren’t going to back down from a proven way of pushing their interests ahead of the people’s.
In this country, folks are fond of saying they want a level playing field so everyone can have an equal chance. Obviously, that philosophy is more lip service than reality in times when the country’s following the Golden Rule: Those who have the gold make the rules.
That needs to change, and the playing field does, indeed, need to be leveled so the people’s interests become dominant, not those of special interests. We do not need our elections to be auctions with candidates and offices going to the highest bidders.
It’s time for the people to make campaign finance reform an issue, to press candidates for not only their positions but for what they will do to help bring about reform. There needs to be a campaign spending ceiling, a limit on how much candidates can spend in campaigns, as much as there needs to be a tighter limit on contributions candidates can receive.
The seemingly endless flow of cash from special interests should be curbed, and there needs to be a more public accounting of where money comes from so we can put an end to “dark” money politics. Anyone who contributes to a candidate or a PAC, political group, committee or even a coffee klatch supporting a candidate needs to be publicly identified so voters know just who is backing him.
We in Arkansas need to know everyone who is pouring money into the U.S. Senate campaign and any other political campaign within the state because those elected represent Arkansans, not the special interests. Campaign finance reform could do that.
The people’s voice needs to speak louder than special interests’ money.
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment