For one, I do like PACs and lobbyists having access to Congressmen. Congressmen, for the most part, aren’t policy experts. I think the PAC community and their lobbyists have alot to contribute (other than money) that the public doesn’t and they are a vital part of our system.

I do think, however, that there are ways to make of elected officials more responsive to their constituencies. For one, we have a problem with the playing field. Incumbents have too big an advantage in elections. I do not like public funding as it has been outlined in the past. Public matching funds are ridiculous.

The airwaves belong to the public though. I have suggested in the past that the FCC, along with the FEC, issue vouchers for campaigns for meeting certain fundraising requirements.

One of the things I like about our campaign finance laws in this country is that they, for the most part, require candidates to have a certain level of personal success to raise enough money to get elected. Since the late 90s we have seen huge jump in the costs of successful campaigns and it is putting even highly qualified challengers into a bigger disadvantage. The average successful challenger raise about $850k in 1998 to get elected. Last year it was more like $1.7mil. That is a little too high.

It is important that we keep private financing in the process. After all…I wouldn’t trust a Bobby Saxon or a Bill Gillespie with matching funds…nor do I want the process to give them an unearned advantage. But, allotting a campaign that raises $300k “x” amount of points to use for placing television advertisements would be more beneficial than giving them an extra hundred grand. This would apply to both incumbents and challengers. Self funding would be exempt. Contribution limits should be lowered…particularly for PACs. This would be incremental (ie $300k get you 300 points, every $100k raised after that get you 100 points up to $600k or $700k) and wouldn’t cost the taxpayers anything (after all, the FCC licenses programming).

Details would need to be worked out, obviously, but this would definitely help The People in a quest for a more responsive Congress.

Lastly, well two things, voting should be something you earn. We should have a test (federally mandated for federal elections…let the state do what they like for their positions) that one must pass before being allowed to register. I would also like to see a federal law, or Constitutional amendment, requiring districts to be drawn with 0 partisan, racial, ethnic, etc bias. I think having 11 districts in GA that are decided strictly by party (3 or 4 by race) is destructive. I have been fortunate to live in the 9th district…I only hope the next congressmen is as trustworthy as Deal. I think having 435 “targeted” races would be healthy for our system. I always here people complain about Congress…”throw them all out” is a common rant. Having 435 congressional districts in this country with a Cook partisan index of 0 would definitely get these @$$holes to wake up and start doing their jobs. This, also, would mitigate any change in advertising rates considering the volume in which air time would be purchased by campaigns. Rather than having a couple hundred campaigns buying air time there should be 900 buying airtime in large amounts.

Or maybe I am just crazy. I mean…how can somebody really expect Congress to pass a bill requiring them to do whats best for their constituents?

If we take the ability to for a person to get individual supporters to help them buy air time, direct mail, phone lines, pay staff, pay rent, etc, then only the independently wealthy can run.

What is your solution, GC?

Otherwise, I, along with my peers, will always be able to get a meeting with and listen to by your congressmen…because we can afford to contribute $4800+ (and raise much much more per) cycle than you.

Violations by the holders of public trust should be treated harshly and violations by the weak and powerless with compassion when appropriate. Unfortunately, it seems that the opposite holds true.

Or we could pass out Harakiri swords upon inauguration and instill a very “liberal” policy of when Seppuku should be performed.