Absolutely NOT. As a taxpayer I fund far too much silliness from politicians. Why should Democrats help fund Republicans, or Ds and Rs fund Libertarians or Greens? Or vice versa? If getting the influence of money out of the campaigns is the goal here, then eliminate the onerous petition rules and just let whoever run for whatever they want. Let's give average everyday folks a better chance to participate. Let's make every vote count. I see this as mainly a protection plan for incumbency and the continuation of the 2 party rule in NY. Getting private money out or campaigns is not going to eliminate corruption, it might even breed more. The Malcolm Smith scandal is a good example of how it would work. Transparency and More Choices are the answer, not protecting the status quo. Term Limits and open elections not primary voting and 30 year incumbents.
I say public financing political campaigns is akin to a state religion. We have a First Amendment in Our US Constitution to guard against that. We should not be forced through taxation to support beliefs we do not hold ourselves. Of course, as we all know the rights guaranteed us by the Constitution don't mean much to Andrew Cuomo.
Just playing devils advocate ... people who don't support birth control pay taxes that fund birth control programs; people who don't support war pay taxes that go to to the defense department; people who don't believe in interstate highways pay taxes that go to interstate highways; people who don't support space exploration pay taxes that go to NASA.
Perhaps public financing helps more third party voices to be heard.
Thought I seriously doubt it would work that way, since the program would be designed by Ds & Rs, so surely it would only benefit Ds and Rs.
Your last sentence, unfortunately is the reality. Cuomo also doesn't have any problem accepting private donations himself, he has something like 33 million dollars in his fund, 7 million came in over the last 6 months, after he announced the Start Up NY Tax Free Zones. I'm sure many of those donors are expecting something back. Even if campaigns become publicly financed, there will still be corruption. Like I said, full Transparency and a better ability to field opponents to corrupt or ineffective legislators is the answer.
The unintended consequence of public campaign finance is that it primarily strengthens the two party system and pretty much limits any real possibility of third or fourth party candidates. Once you finance through public funds, you empower especially the party in office at the time.
Rather than limit possible corruption, it enables it, All that really is needed are strengthening of full disclosure laws. Knowing who is donating is telling and pretty much strengthens or weakens a candidates position.
Not to veer to far off subject, Howard, but the current taxation system in this country is little less than tyranny. I suppose as long as we have government, we will all fund things we don't like. It needs to kept to a minimum, though, a few of your examples could easily be eliminated from public funding, and still have enough people who support them that will keep it available. Birth Control programs, Interstate Highways, probably even NASA could and should become privately funded. I'd love to have an answer that eliminates war, but I don't.
Is Coumo really trying to reform? ..If he is ,then set a limit on how much can be spent on the governor's race...Let say 10 million is all a candidate can spend..Its like a salary cap..And it is raised privately no public money..
I agree that the simplest solution is a spending cap prorated by per capita income and population of the district. This spending cap would be for BOTH hard and soft money.
The simplest solution is vote for the candidates who have the least amount of money and who spend the least amount of money on their campaigns. We're all foolish to believe that we are truly voting for the best person in any position at any level propped up by either of the two controlling parties. Hundreds of years of history and thousands of elections have proven that money doesn't buy quality representation/government.
Dave is right - almost everything that government claims to do can be done privately. As for war, pass an amendment that prohibits wars of aggression beyond our current borders, both through funding and active participation. If citizens want to donate money to their favorite location on the other side of the planet, let them write a check. Enough already. We should have 100 years of peace as a goal ending with complete removal of the veterans support system once we have no veterans of war to support.
Hey everybody there is a "Tax Free Zone" out there in New York. I saw it advertised on a Prince Andrew television commercial. I will be actively looking for this zone as I will be packing my bags and moving there as soon as I discover it. I've heard I won't have to pay taxes for ten whole years. when I find the zone I will bring a bus to Batavia and you are all welcome to come with me to set up home. The zone will be called Andrewville in honor of our generous emperor . When the ten years are over, I'll have another bus leaving state.
First off- we reform the BoE laws so there are a maximum of 20 slots for any state or local office on the ballot line. No party or individual has a default line on the ballot; slots are afforded on a first-come/first-served basis. Applications for placement on the ballot must be submitted to the BoE by campaign committees which include a chairman, secretary and treasurer to include the signatures of 100 registered voters who reside in the jurisdiction served by the office in question and may not be members of the campaign committee. Applications are numbered, consecutively, as received, to determine ballot position- up to the maximum of twenty. A party designation is optional. No party or individual candidate is afforded the right to challenge any other candidate's application.
Second- we open print shops in all of the state prisons so prisoners can manufacture campaign bling.
Third- we offer a tax deduction for all media, production houses, printers and advertising companies to produce campaign advertising. To qualify for the deduction, the company must be located in NYS and not refuse access to any candidate who requests services unless in the case of the media, the broadcast area or circulation of print media does not regularly include the area served by the office the candidate is running for.
These suggestions are not definitive. They are offered to demonstrate that fair and public financed elections are possible without introducing a new hog trough to the state budget.
First, good luck ever reforming the BoE in NYS - it's 100% controlled by the controllers. Who manages the Genesee County BoE? Oh yeah, only registered Democrats and Republicans. If by some miracle we could get the NYS Elections Law changed, what we absolutely should enact is a single line for any candidate who can have as many little tiny endorsement symbols as he or she can fit in the confined space available on the ballot. Line positioning, top to bottom, should be done by random draw in a multi-party supervised lottery once candidate petitions are verified. We want fairness and equal treatment in elections. The controllers don't...
That's not entirely true, David, but overall, yes. My self-esteem does not derive from popularity on thebatavian.com. Third parties seeking a level playing field in a nation that (on the whole) envisions itself as either blue or red either keeps opinions close or expects disagreement. As Mr. Brown pointed out, any election reform touted by the two major parties will not be aimed at fairness. The point is to restrain team A from outspending team B. As with all wounds- the medicine cannot be applied until the bandage comes off. The point of any third party is dissent. The price of dissent is resistance.
C.M., I for one think your ideas are spot on. As for your second point, several print shops already exist in NYS prisons and a few have recently been shuttered for some reason. They are good, cost saving alternatives.
Corcraft can sell to non profits. For example, they can sell waste paper baskets to schools and government agencies. They can not sell to you and compete with Office Max.
Attica teaches small engine repair. You can not take your lawn mower there and have it repaired instead of going to a repair shop. The print shop there can not compete with the Penny Saver.
You and I are pretty close to agreement on this one. I hope you were sitting down when you read that.
Moving on.
The basic problem with any notion to "reform" campaign laws is that laws are written by individuals with a personal interest in benefiting from the "reform" in question. All schemes aimed at publicly funding campaigns only do one thing: The magnify the power of incumbency while giving the perception of making things "fair".
In publicly funded campaigns the incumbent and the challenger get the same amount of money to campaign with, but the incumbent has the press, the public meetings, the official mailings and the official functions to supplement his or her campaign expenditures.
Maybe we should only publicly fund the challengers... That right there is a thought. Talk about leveling the playing field.
John, I don't want to belabor the point; just two comments on Corcraft. Provisioning non-profits is still competing with the private sector. Schools would buy from OfficeMax et al (and likely do) if Corcraft didn't offer an alternative. Schools (and other government agencies) generally group buy through state contract for most of their annual equipment and supply purchases. Corcraft (I believe) is considered a preferred vendor unless the specs don't match. As for campaign purchases, I would presume election committees to be non-profit. They require a designated account, must be registered with the BoE, get a tax number and are monitored by the BoE.
CM,
We are talking about two entities. Corcraft is a semi separate division of the prison system. And what you say about them is true. But the prisons themselves can not compete. Attica has a print shop, but it is not allowed to sell to the public, or even non profits. Corcraft has a print shop down in Elmira and it is allowed to sell its products.
Absolutely NOT. As a taxpayer
Absolutely NOT. As a taxpayer I fund far too much silliness from politicians. Why should Democrats help fund Republicans, or Ds and Rs fund Libertarians or Greens? Or vice versa? If getting the influence of money out of the campaigns is the goal here, then eliminate the onerous petition rules and just let whoever run for whatever they want. Let's give average everyday folks a better chance to participate. Let's make every vote count. I see this as mainly a protection plan for incumbency and the continuation of the 2 party rule in NY. Getting private money out or campaigns is not going to eliminate corruption, it might even breed more. The Malcolm Smith scandal is a good example of how it would work. Transparency and More Choices are the answer, not protecting the status quo. Term Limits and open elections not primary voting and 30 year incumbents.
I say public financing
I say public financing political campaigns is akin to a state religion. We have a First Amendment in Our US Constitution to guard against that. We should not be forced through taxation to support beliefs we do not hold ourselves. Of course, as we all know the rights guaranteed us by the Constitution don't mean much to Andrew Cuomo.
Just playing devils advocate
Just playing devils advocate ... people who don't support birth control pay taxes that fund birth control programs; people who don't support war pay taxes that go to to the defense department; people who don't believe in interstate highways pay taxes that go to interstate highways; people who don't support space exploration pay taxes that go to NASA.
Perhaps public financing helps more third party voices to be heard.
Thought I seriously doubt it would work that way, since the program would be designed by Ds & Rs, so surely it would only benefit Ds and Rs.
Your last sentence,
Your last sentence, unfortunately is the reality. Cuomo also doesn't have any problem accepting private donations himself, he has something like 33 million dollars in his fund, 7 million came in over the last 6 months, after he announced the Start Up NY Tax Free Zones. I'm sure many of those donors are expecting something back. Even if campaigns become publicly financed, there will still be corruption. Like I said, full Transparency and a better ability to field opponents to corrupt or ineffective legislators is the answer.
The unintended consequence of
The unintended consequence of public campaign finance is that it primarily strengthens the two party system and pretty much limits any real possibility of third or fourth party candidates. Once you finance through public funds, you empower especially the party in office at the time.
Rather than limit possible corruption, it enables it, All that really is needed are strengthening of full disclosure laws. Knowing who is donating is telling and pretty much strengthens or weakens a candidates position.
Not to veer to far off
Not to veer to far off subject, Howard, but the current taxation system in this country is little less than tyranny. I suppose as long as we have government, we will all fund things we don't like. It needs to kept to a minimum, though, a few of your examples could easily be eliminated from public funding, and still have enough people who support them that will keep it available. Birth Control programs, Interstate Highways, probably even NASA could and should become privately funded. I'd love to have an answer that eliminates war, but I don't.
Is Coumo really trying to
Is Coumo really trying to reform? ..If he is ,then set a limit on how much can be spent on the governor's race...Let say 10 million is all a candidate can spend..Its like a salary cap..And it is raised privately no public money..
I agree that the simplest
I agree that the simplest solution is a spending cap prorated by per capita income and population of the district. This spending cap would be for BOTH hard and soft money.
That should even the playing field.
The simplest solution is vote
The simplest solution is vote for the candidates who have the least amount of money and who spend the least amount of money on their campaigns. We're all foolish to believe that we are truly voting for the best person in any position at any level propped up by either of the two controlling parties. Hundreds of years of history and thousands of elections have proven that money doesn't buy quality representation/government.
Dave is right - almost everything that government claims to do can be done privately. As for war, pass an amendment that prohibits wars of aggression beyond our current borders, both through funding and active participation. If citizens want to donate money to their favorite location on the other side of the planet, let them write a check. Enough already. We should have 100 years of peace as a goal ending with complete removal of the veterans support system once we have no veterans of war to support.
Hey everybody there is a
Hey everybody there is a "Tax Free Zone" out there in New York. I saw it advertised on a Prince Andrew television commercial. I will be actively looking for this zone as I will be packing my bags and moving there as soon as I discover it. I've heard I won't have to pay taxes for ten whole years. when I find the zone I will bring a bus to Batavia and you are all welcome to come with me to set up home. The zone will be called Andrewville in honor of our generous emperor . When the ten years are over, I'll have another bus leaving state.
First off- we reform the BoE
First off- we reform the BoE laws so there are a maximum of 20 slots for any state or local office on the ballot line. No party or individual has a default line on the ballot; slots are afforded on a first-come/first-served basis. Applications for placement on the ballot must be submitted to the BoE by campaign committees which include a chairman, secretary and treasurer to include the signatures of 100 registered voters who reside in the jurisdiction served by the office in question and may not be members of the campaign committee. Applications are numbered, consecutively, as received, to determine ballot position- up to the maximum of twenty. A party designation is optional. No party or individual candidate is afforded the right to challenge any other candidate's application.
Second- we open print shops in all of the state prisons so prisoners can manufacture campaign bling.
Third- we offer a tax deduction for all media, production houses, printers and advertising companies to produce campaign advertising. To qualify for the deduction, the company must be located in NYS and not refuse access to any candidate who requests services unless in the case of the media, the broadcast area or circulation of print media does not regularly include the area served by the office the candidate is running for.
These suggestions are not definitive. They are offered to demonstrate that fair and public financed elections are possible without introducing a new hog trough to the state budget.
c.m. you ever notice that no
c.m. you ever notice that no matter what you say here you end up with a negative vote?
First, good luck ever
First, good luck ever reforming the BoE in NYS - it's 100% controlled by the controllers. Who manages the Genesee County BoE? Oh yeah, only registered Democrats and Republicans. If by some miracle we could get the NYS Elections Law changed, what we absolutely should enact is a single line for any candidate who can have as many little tiny endorsement symbols as he or she can fit in the confined space available on the ballot. Line positioning, top to bottom, should be done by random draw in a multi-party supervised lottery once candidate petitions are verified. We want fairness and equal treatment in elections. The controllers don't...
That's not entirely true,
That's not entirely true, David, but overall, yes. My self-esteem does not derive from popularity on thebatavian.com. Third parties seeking a level playing field in a nation that (on the whole) envisions itself as either blue or red either keeps opinions close or expects disagreement. As Mr. Brown pointed out, any election reform touted by the two major parties will not be aimed at fairness. The point is to restrain team A from outspending team B. As with all wounds- the medicine cannot be applied until the bandage comes off. The point of any third party is dissent. The price of dissent is resistance.
C.M., I for one think your
C.M., I for one think your ideas are spot on. As for your second point, several print shops already exist in NYS prisons and a few have recently been shuttered for some reason. They are good, cost saving alternatives.
CM, your ideas are not bad.
CM, your ideas are not bad. Have to go with Robert Brown on ballot position, it should be random after the petitions are validated.
As a side note on prisons, it is illegal to use inmate labor to compete with any private business.
Someone better advise
Someone better advise Corcraft of that restriction...
Corcraft can sell to non
Corcraft can sell to non profits. For example, they can sell waste paper baskets to schools and government agencies. They can not sell to you and compete with Office Max.
Attica teaches small engine repair. You can not take your lawn mower there and have it repaired instead of going to a repair shop. The print shop there can not compete with the Penny Saver.
C. M., You and I are pretty
C. M.,
You and I are pretty close to agreement on this one. I hope you were sitting down when you read that.
Moving on.
The basic problem with any notion to "reform" campaign laws is that laws are written by individuals with a personal interest in benefiting from the "reform" in question. All schemes aimed at publicly funding campaigns only do one thing: The magnify the power of incumbency while giving the perception of making things "fair".
In publicly funded campaigns the incumbent and the challenger get the same amount of money to campaign with, but the incumbent has the press, the public meetings, the official mailings and the official functions to supplement his or her campaign expenditures.
Maybe we should only publicly fund the challengers... That right there is a thought. Talk about leveling the playing field.
John, I don't want to belabor
John, I don't want to belabor the point; just two comments on Corcraft. Provisioning non-profits is still competing with the private sector. Schools would buy from OfficeMax et al (and likely do) if Corcraft didn't offer an alternative. Schools (and other government agencies) generally group buy through state contract for most of their annual equipment and supply purchases. Corcraft (I believe) is considered a preferred vendor unless the specs don't match. As for campaign purchases, I would presume election committees to be non-profit. They require a designated account, must be registered with the BoE, get a tax number and are monitored by the BoE.
CM, We are talking about two
CM,
We are talking about two entities. Corcraft is a semi separate division of the prison system. And what you say about them is true. But the prisons themselves can not compete. Attica has a print shop, but it is not allowed to sell to the public, or even non profits. Corcraft has a print shop down in Elmira and it is allowed to sell its products.