Reflections on responsibility

[David Weitz <davidweitz@mail.com>]

I've enjoyed reading most of the posts in this discussion.  I think it's an important discussion because I think funding of political campaigns is an important issue.  Three items seem to recur: 

A) How influence is exerted upon an office holder; 
B) The average citizen just won't study issues and funding;
C) Citizen frustration with office holders is at a high level.

The assumption is that money=influence and that is likely true to an extent but if it were possible to control campaign funding (which I doubt) that wouldn't resolve the problems.  

The office holders I know personally are basically good people trying to do a good job.  At the risk of sounding naive I'd suggest that many of us assume that if the office holder votes "against" our point of view h/she is being influenced by money.  It isn't necessarily so.  If people are truly frustrated and concerned they can take action to champion other candidates.  The history of this country shows that when one or both parties become too entrenched a third party will arise to dislodge them from their comfort.  To the extent that we can mandate full disclosure we should -- and expect citizens to take responsibility for electing candidates they can live with.

Federal funding of campaigns means deciding who is "qualified" to receive funding and that's a terribly slippery slope.  None of the options addresses the fairness issue when one candidate is rich and doesn't need either contributions or state or federal funding.

Best,
Dave Weitz