Comment Appropriate Reaction (Score 1) 174
The problem with the solutions mentioned thus far to the campaign finance conundrum is that they all seek to fix things within the framework of the current system.
As near as I can reckon, the current system of campaigns and elections operates something like this:
1) candidates collect donations from constituents, a disproportionate share of which comes from wealthy individuals and organizations.
2) candidates spend donations with Big Media, buying advertising which raises awareness among voters. The biggest spenders generate the most awareness and also get annointed as "leading candidates," making it easier to raise more money, get covered by the press, organize campaign staffs, etc.
3) candidates with the widest awareness, best press coverage, best organized campaigns, etc., win their elections
4) candidates take office and enact laws which represent their constituents' interests as best they can determine. Of course, their constituents' interests are disproportionately represented by those who have given generously to their campaign.
5) candidates collect donations from constituents...
An appropriate reaction must be one that does not rely on the goodwill of establishment interests to fix this broken process. I.e., trying to enact laws to derail the current election process will necessarily fail, because lawmakers rely on strong economic interests for their power and the strong economic interests need to ensure their continued central position. The same thing is true for those who propose reliance on a free press, because the press's interests are tied to the candidates and the donors through ad spending.
Individuals' voices are not being heard, and it's too risky to pin your hopes on the belief that with enough rich people donating, everyone's views will be represented. The appropriate reaction is to reinvent the process, and organize to implement the new process. Luckily, our system still has one set of democratic safeguards, which are free elections; so ultimately, a well-organized populace has recourse. But, the channel for communication between citizens and leaders needs to be overhauled, from one based on campaign contributions and broadcast media to one based on a technology-enabled direct dialogue -- a dialogue enabled by the Internet.
As near as I can reckon, the current system of campaigns and elections operates something like this:
1) candidates collect donations from constituents, a disproportionate share of which comes from wealthy individuals and organizations.
2) candidates spend donations with Big Media, buying advertising which raises awareness among voters. The biggest spenders generate the most awareness and also get annointed as "leading candidates," making it easier to raise more money, get covered by the press, organize campaign staffs, etc.
3) candidates with the widest awareness, best press coverage, best organized campaigns, etc., win their elections
4) candidates take office and enact laws which represent their constituents' interests as best they can determine. Of course, their constituents' interests are disproportionately represented by those who have given generously to their campaign.
5) candidates collect donations from constituents...
An appropriate reaction must be one that does not rely on the goodwill of establishment interests to fix this broken process. I.e., trying to enact laws to derail the current election process will necessarily fail, because lawmakers rely on strong economic interests for their power and the strong economic interests need to ensure their continued central position. The same thing is true for those who propose reliance on a free press, because the press's interests are tied to the candidates and the donors through ad spending.
Individuals' voices are not being heard, and it's too risky to pin your hopes on the belief that with enough rich people donating, everyone's views will be represented. The appropriate reaction is to reinvent the process, and organize to implement the new process. Luckily, our system still has one set of democratic safeguards, which are free elections; so ultimately, a well-organized populace has recourse. But, the channel for communication between citizens and leaders needs to be overhauled, from one based on campaign contributions and broadcast media to one based on a technology-enabled direct dialogue -- a dialogue enabled by the Internet.
