This great article concluded in 2006 that the increasing costs ended up stifling competition regarding political seats, creating a state of "partisan stasis. "
How outrageous is pretty much everything insanity? Consider many simple math:
- The typical Congressional office case makes about $170, 000 a year in salary. If you try to portion the campaign cost with the salary of your eventual winner you have a ratio of greater than 23 to 1. Put simply, for every earnings dollar received, over $23 will be spent to receive that $1. Makes no sense on top.
- If the common flu shot prices $10 per picture, then this $2 billion would have given two thirds with the country's population a free flu shot.
- If you're alive since the actual birth of Christ and had spent $2, 500 daily, every day via then until today, you still can have not spent $2 thousand.
- According into a Parade Magazine article a few years ago, $2 billion dollars could hire virtually 5, 000 teachers to get a year, buy medical insurance for 50, 000 American households and provide 83 million college lunches for desperate children.
Obviously you can go crazy using the numbers. The financial well being, though, is in which $2 billion full, $4 million per Congressional seat, is a lot of cash to spend for the job that merely pays $170, 000. It truly is this 23 to at least one payback that illustrates just how much power and freedom has migrated from the ordinary citizens with this country to individuals sitting in The legislature. No sane man or women would personally fork out $23 to possibly win back $1, if prosperous. Only in a great American election can this irrational behavior be regarded as rational.
And the holier than though attitude with the Democrats in this election does not hold water. We all know that if any politician will get their hands on money to be sure their re-election, then principles head out the door. The Democrats are not mad because the Republicans are spending so much money. They are mad because they do not have that amount of money to spend that time like they does in 2004. The hypocrisy is extraordinary. No one states that that any politician Has got to take the money presented in their eyes for their election campaign. However, has there ever been an politician of which not take money shown to them?
It is obvious with this insanity that our own political class whatsoever levels of government cannot control their urges for taking any money anytime to ensure their comfortable positions with Congress and somewhere else. That is why these suggestions are needed to take the money decisions out of their hands in addition to structurally change the particular election process in this country:
- 1 - allow merely individual Americans to contribute to election campaigns, certainly not corporations, unions, PACs, etc. The U. Ersus. Constitution guarantees overall flexibility of speech for people, not organizations.
- Step 2 - allow only those affected by an election to promote their respective election campaigns. For instance, only those moving into a specific Kansas Congressional district should be allowed to contribute to people running for The nation's lawmakers from that selection district, i. Jim Graves campaign