The Alan Grayson Page

The Anthony Weiner Page

Guest Contributors

Note

  • BN-Politics' administrators respect, but do not necessarily endorse, views expressed by our contributors. Our goal is to get the ideas out there. After that, they're on their own.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2007

Blog Catalog

  • Liberalism Political Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory

Blogorian!

Blogged


« Cokie Roberts Thinks Obama Should Have Gone to Myrtle Beach | Main | Hillary Campaign Emails: Dems Shoot at Their Own Feet Again »

August 11, 2008

Comments

Adam

In a word: no.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/why-howard-wolfson-is-out-of-job.html

Deb Cupples

Adam,

I read the 538 piece. It makes sense, though I haven't studied the facts.

Even if Wolfson overstated his case, I suspect that Edwards' continuation into the primary season did help Obama-- but it's only a non-provable speculation (the same as any other speculation would be).

Frankly, I don't know why Wolfson even brought it up.

Deb Cupples

Adam,

I'm still interested in reading your thoughts on the the table I mentioned earlier (industry-tied donations received by McCain and Obama).

http://bucknakedpolitics.typepad.com/buck_naked_politics/2008/08/tained-campaign.html

Adam

I don't necessarily buy that greater money, in and of itself, leads to (or reflects)greater corruption. There's no question that

1) Given the explosion of media sources, it's become more expensive to compete nationally, and

2) Politicans have found new approaches (primarily but not exclusively through the internet) to raise more money.

While I don't disagree that bad policy is more expensive for taxpayers than any public finance system could be, I don't think it follows that public finance will lead to better policy. Moreover, how would you restrict independent groups from agitating for issues that are clearly tied to one candidate or another? This is and has been the bugaboo of campaign finance reform. It's a pretty thorny legal issue.

Before I call a politician corrupt, I would like to see some evidence of actual causal linkage between contributions and voting. That might, at first glance, seem like a tight standard, but the reality is that politicians are pretty blatant about this stuff. Look at the AT&T contributions before the FISA vote, or the oil contributions before McCain's drilling flip-flop. You actually don't have to look too close to see this stuff.

The comments to this entry are closed.