$10,514,206. That's a lot of money. But in politics, how much money is too much? Is ten million dollars too much?
The results are in for the special election in the 50th Congressional District located along the coast through Carlsbad and stretching inland throughout North County. It is reported to be the first $10 million congressional campaign for a six month term in U.S. history according to the research firm, www.opensecrets.org.
By now the winner is well known. Former Republican U. S. Representative Brian Bilbray defeated Democrat and Cardiff school board member, Francine Busby by a 52% to 48% margin. Whether the election turned on Busby's last minute gaffe over illegal immigration and voting, we don't know.
What we do know is the amount of money spent by the candidates and their respective congressional campaign committee's independent expenditures is simply unheard of.
For weeks leading up to the race, every TV and radio station in greater San Diego was inundated with "he said", "she said" negative ads. I am also fairly certain the entire Cleveland National Forest was harvested of its timber crop and the resulting paper products were turned into direct mailers that stuffed my mailbox.
Unfortunately, I think this was just a preview of what is to come later this fall in other political contests locally and up and down the state. Which leads me to ask: When is enough, really enough?
Ten million dollars in donations and expenditures for a six month job…would any of us in business really entertain such a fantasy?
I have heard many pundits and congressmen state with much gravitas, "The balance of power in the entire House of Representatives is at stake in the Bilbray seat. The race in California's 50th congressional district will decide the fate of the Congress for years to come."
Yes, it's true, the president's poll numbers are in the tank; same for congress. But is the fate of the republic really hanging in the balance?
I am an admitted fiscal conservative. I do not want the tax rate on our household or company income to go up. Smaller government generally appeals to me.
So, yes, I agree, there was a certain level of true importance to the Busby-Bilbray race given the political fortunes for the president and the congress right now. And as much as I am pleased by the final results of Mr. Bilbray's win, maybe it would have chastened those in Washington, DC had Brian Bilbray lost. Perhaps then the majority party in congress and the president would have really felt the hard reality that the American public wants action and results on major issues of the day?not rhetoric and obfuscation.
By the time this column is in print, Brian Bilbray will have already been sworn in and be back to work as the newest member of congress. Because of his previous service he will have some level of seniority that may let him leapfrog other more junior members in the rank and file. That should help San Diego when his committee assignments are made. Let's hope. But, how much government did we just get for our $10 million?
California has the dubious distinction of owning several rather incredible records when it comes to campaign finance according to the records we found at the opensecrets website.
The state is first in the nation in overall itemized federal campaign dollars raised, at $80,681,156 in the 2005-2006 campaign cycle. We are also first in the total amount of dollars donated to Republican candidates, at $37,976,986. Proving that our moniker as the "Golden State" is no fluke, we are first again in total individual donations of $200 or more, at $95,125,262.
Our second place numbers are equally impressive with $42,101,413 going to Democrat candidates and $9,782,516 being donated to PACs, or Political Action Committees. Donations from PACs in Washington, DC however, topped the country at $77,797,151.
The 2004 race for president generated a total of $880.5 million in campaign receipts. By contrast, the 1980 race accounted for just $161.9 million. It seems safe to predict the 2008 presidential contest will be the country's first billion dollar campaign. That's billion, with a 'B'. Is that something we really need to spend a billion on?
Several good friends of mine are active in Sacramento and Washington either as elected officials or lobbyists. All of them agree the amount of money being raised and spent in political campaigns has gotten out of control. It's too much.
Most elected officials I know simply detest picking up the phone and asking their friends and supporters for money. So, when a politician starts their own PAC, which right now is perfectly legal, and a lobbyist friend, or a business offers to help fund that PAC, it relieves the elected official of that dreaded task.
The relationship is too cozy. The amount of money involved is simply too much. The influence generated by the close affiliation between legislators and financial supporters is a blatant conflict of interest.
How do we fix it? What's the solution? I wish I knew.
Some believe in public funding. Others advocate fixed limits on periods when donations may be solicited or received. Money in politics seems like mercury on a mirror. Push it one way and it scatters into a million little balls rolling into every corner and edge of the surface. Trying to keep track of all those little pieces is surely impossible. Money in politics seems the same way. Legal and political experts have designed a seemingly endless array of exceptions and loopholes to campaign finance laws.
When, as a society, and as citizens, do we reach a point of absolute repugnance with this issue of money in politics? What's our tolerance level? Is it ten million dollars for a six month job? Is it a billion dollars for a presidential race?
How much government do we really get for all that money? Are you satisfied for the price? Maybe it's time to take the mercury off the mirror, then hold it up and see if we like the reflection.
The results are in for the special election in the 50th Congressional District located along the coast through Carlsbad and stretching inland throughout North County. It is reported to be the first $10 million congressional campaign for a six month term in U.S. history according to the research firm, www.opensecrets.org.
By now the winner is well known. Former Republican U. S. Representative Brian Bilbray defeated Democrat and Cardiff school board member, Francine Busby by a 52% to 48% margin. Whether the election turned on Busby's last minute gaffe over illegal immigration and voting, we don't know.
What we do know is the amount of money spent by the candidates and their respective congressional campaign committee's independent expenditures is simply unheard of.
For weeks leading up to the race, every TV and radio station in greater San Diego was inundated with "he said", "she said" negative ads. I am also fairly certain the entire Cleveland National Forest was harvested of its timber crop and the resulting paper products were turned into direct mailers that stuffed my mailbox.
Unfortunately, I think this was just a preview of what is to come later this fall in other political contests locally and up and down the state. Which leads me to ask: When is enough, really enough?
Ten million dollars in donations and expenditures for a six month job…would any of us in business really entertain such a fantasy?
I have heard many pundits and congressmen state with much gravitas, "The balance of power in the entire House of Representatives is at stake in the Bilbray seat. The race in California's 50th congressional district will decide the fate of the Congress for years to come."
Yes, it's true, the president's poll numbers are in the tank; same for congress. But is the fate of the republic really hanging in the balance?
I am an admitted fiscal conservative. I do not want the tax rate on our household or company income to go up. Smaller government generally appeals to me.
So, yes, I agree, there was a certain level of true importance to the Busby-Bilbray race given the political fortunes for the president and the congress right now. And as much as I am pleased by the final results of Mr. Bilbray's win, maybe it would have chastened those in Washington, DC had Brian Bilbray lost. Perhaps then the majority party in congress and the president would have really felt the hard reality that the American public wants action and results on major issues of the day?not rhetoric and obfuscation.
By the time this column is in print, Brian Bilbray will have already been sworn in and be back to work as the newest member of congress. Because of his previous service he will have some level of seniority that may let him leapfrog other more junior members in the rank and file. That should help San Diego when his committee assignments are made. Let's hope. But, how much government did we just get for our $10 million?
California has the dubious distinction of owning several rather incredible records when it comes to campaign finance according to the records we found at the opensecrets website.
The state is first in the nation in overall itemized federal campaign dollars raised, at $80,681,156 in the 2005-2006 campaign cycle. We are also first in the total amount of dollars donated to Republican candidates, at $37,976,986. Proving that our moniker as the "Golden State" is no fluke, we are first again in total individual donations of $200 or more, at $95,125,262.
Our second place numbers are equally impressive with $42,101,413 going to Democrat candidates and $9,782,516 being donated to PACs, or Political Action Committees. Donations from PACs in Washington, DC however, topped the country at $77,797,151.
The 2004 race for president generated a total of $880.5 million in campaign receipts. By contrast, the 1980 race accounted for just $161.9 million. It seems safe to predict the 2008 presidential contest will be the country's first billion dollar campaign. That's billion, with a 'B'. Is that something we really need to spend a billion on?
Several good friends of mine are active in Sacramento and Washington either as elected officials or lobbyists. All of them agree the amount of money being raised and spent in political campaigns has gotten out of control. It's too much.
Most elected officials I know simply detest picking up the phone and asking their friends and supporters for money. So, when a politician starts their own PAC, which right now is perfectly legal, and a lobbyist friend, or a business offers to help fund that PAC, it relieves the elected official of that dreaded task.
The relationship is too cozy. The amount of money involved is simply too much. The influence generated by the close affiliation between legislators and financial supporters is a blatant conflict of interest.
How do we fix it? What's the solution? I wish I knew.
Some believe in public funding. Others advocate fixed limits on periods when donations may be solicited or received. Money in politics seems like mercury on a mirror. Push it one way and it scatters into a million little balls rolling into every corner and edge of the surface. Trying to keep track of all those little pieces is surely impossible. Money in politics seems the same way. Legal and political experts have designed a seemingly endless array of exceptions and loopholes to campaign finance laws.
When, as a society, and as citizens, do we reach a point of absolute repugnance with this issue of money in politics? What's our tolerance level? Is it ten million dollars for a six month job? Is it a billion dollars for a presidential race?
How much government do we really get for all that money? Are you satisfied for the price? Maybe it's time to take the mercury off the mirror, then hold it up and see if we like the reflection.