Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Jimmy Carter calls for return to publicly financed elections [View all]vkkv
(3,384 posts)17. The public is ALREADY PAYING for elections THROUGH THE HIGH COSTS OF insurance, education, prisons..
Voters here in the U.S. must demand PUBLICLY FINANCED ELECTIONS with strict spending limits because if you look at the big picture, we ARE ALREADY PAYING for elections THROUGH THE HIGH COSTS OF insurance, education, prisons, crime, pharmaceuticals, energy, food (future food prices could sky-rocket with thanks to Mansanto) and even war. Much of the money you spend on goods goes into the pockets of a politician who may vote on legislation that is bad for you or worse, for the entire country.
You know the saying, "the best Congress money can buy! " - it is more truthful now than ever with the conservative SCOTUS ( 5 GOP appointed / 4 Dem appointed) making "Citizens United" legal. The word "Citizens" is really 'Corporations', but conservative leaders don't tell us that. Many Dem leaders have called for the end of "Citizens United" but not ONE single word coming from Republicans. Care to guess why??
We are quickly on our way to becoming a third-world country where leaders are paid-off by corporations and the "we people" are left out of the picture.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
69 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Bwas Bernie Sanders going to take public funding for his General Election campaign?
brooklynite
Jun 2016
#3
No. Though Bernie Sanders raised his funds from small donors, he raised too much money to qualify.
w4rma
Jun 2016
#4
Each candidate, no matter the party should be funded equally. No private money in elections, none!
Dont call me Shirley
Jun 2016
#39
In addition, there should be accurate exit polling done for all major elections...
Raster
Jun 2016
#6
He's right, of course, but this nation is too far down the rabbit hole to recover
tabasco
Jun 2016
#9
"Publicly subsidized" elections would be a more accurate term. Those fund raising drives
w4rma
Jun 2016
#12
The public is ALREADY PAYING for elections THROUGH THE HIGH COSTS OF insurance, education, prisons..
vkkv
Jun 2016
#17
Publicly funded elections would make politicians less corrupt - but that's not what politicians
Little Tich
Jun 2016
#19
Jimmy was a good President who got unfairly swamped by the times. But he's been a great former ...
marble falls
Jun 2016
#22
I think we can pare it down even tighter. The policies that "help" the 1% won't keep a total ....
marble falls
Jun 2016
#50
But what is left out of the story is that to get anything moving it will take lots of money now
tonyt53
Jun 2016
#26
Campaigns should be structured, like a good hiring process. Thorough, as fair as possible, etc.
TryLogic
Jun 2016
#27
A K-State math prof's analysis says Kansas almost certainly did not reelect Brownback. Of course
tblue37
Jun 2016
#62
The airwaves are public, tv, radio and internet should be forced to provide an equal amount of
Dont call me Shirley
Jun 2016
#37
Why haven't I heard a word attacking Republins on this in Democratic campaigns?
Craig234
Jun 2016
#44
"Publicly financed elections" == public money *added* to the corporate schmiergeld. n/t
Old Union Guy
Jun 2016
#60
K & R. Excellent plan President Carter. Many thanks, all the best and be well.
appalachiablue
Jun 2016
#66