|
And do we really believe that the contributions have no influence, directly or indirectly, on the decisions which those receiving them make? We've seen examples in both political parties where that's exactly what happens, and not just in Illinois and Massachusetts.
There are two actions in the works that might reduce the influence and power of political donations.
1. The Granny D Task Force. Right now, a nine-member "Citizen Funded Election Task Force" is working itself through the Legislature. It is House Bill 513 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.u... and is the result of the Granny D Commission that last year worked for several months to explore the concept, promoted by that wonderful woman who is in her 100th year, of having a voluntary public-funded campaign system available for candidates who wish to avoid the fundraising that puts them at the feet of large contributors. It's a system at work in a dozen other states. It can work here. The Commission will report back with suggested legislation to create such a plan on December 1, 2010.
2. Prohibiting Donations From Corporations. Legislation is in the works and again will be introduced this Fall for next January's Legislative Session to prohibit contributions from corporations. Right now, New Hampshire is one of just a few states where corporations can contribute to political campaigns and parties directly out of their treasuries, and they -- the corporations -- don't have to file reports of those contributions to the Secretary of State's Office. That kind of financial influence -- companies buying candidates, or at least paying for their election to office -- is something that should be stopped. Republicans in particular have benefited from that kind of fundraising in the past.
But those changes will take a while to accomplish.
In the meantime, what I think should happen is that Democratic Party Chair Ray Buckley should challenge Republican Party Chair John Sununu to reject ALL donations from the insurance industry, no matter how small or how large, while the debate about health care continues in Washington. The insurance lobby wants to protect its "middleperson" status where they can sponge as many dollars out of health care as they can. Let's disarm the political influence of the insurance lobby over candidates by just saying "no" to their dollars.
Further, all candidates for public office in 2010 should refuse to seek or accept money from the insurance industry. They're in the business of making money, and they will make more money by fighting against real health care reform.
Both political parties and their candidates should stand above being bought and paid for. And yes, that is what happens way too often as a result of political donations. I'm not insulting anyone's character by pointing that out. Just stating a fact. We need to clean up politics, not justify more dollars to influence it.
If the Republicans don't refuse the cash, our Democratic candidates, at least, should say "no." That doesn't disarm our candidates -- it empowers them to come up with a health care plan that isn't just profit-centered to make the insurance industry happy. Voters will understand that voting for "Democrats Who Say 'No Thanks'" they'll be putting people in office who will do the job for the American people, not for insurance companies. That's a decent advantage in the next election.
|
Blue Hampshire RSS
