Disclosure

[Vivian Tenney <teny@telepath.com>]

I have given this considerable thought and I simply do not see disclosure as a true solution to the problems we face in campaign finance.  So you know that John Smith gave x number of dollars.  So what?  Who is John Smith?  What is his motivation for giving?  Why the amount that he gave?  

Looking at another aspect of disclosure:  not all states mandate electronic report filing, thus it is very difficult to find out how many candidates or PACs John Smith donated to.  Then there is the fact that no newspaper is going to print the full reports.  No way.  Not unless someone pays them to do so.  They are, after all, a business and aren't going to print such long lists of information for nothing!  So, how would the public get the information?  Only a small amount of information will actually be printed where the public would have access to it.  And, it definitely would not provide any kind of control which is our problem:  how to control the role of money in politics.

Our country was founded by men and women who were under the impression that their views should be represented in the British parliament.  Most had little tolerance for the aristocracy.  And what is it that we get if we allow the very rich to run our government?  Another instance of a class society where the priviledged class tells the other classes how to live!  That is going backward, in my opinion!  We have taken steps to give more people a voice, allowing blacks, then women, to vote.  Then we try to nulify that vote by making money the real consideration so that only those with a lot of money are heard.  Our elected representatives no longer represent the people.  They represent the wealthy.  That's just wrong.