0 votes

Congrats to John Edwards!

OK let’s get busy.

John Edwards has just announced that he’s going to accept public campaign financing!

“Edwards is the first top-tier Democratic candidate to agree to this funding mechanism, and he noted it will include the primary and general elections. Although he has already begun raising money for the general election, federal law requires him to return those funds if he accepts public funding.”

If we can ‘shame’ Hillary and Obama into doing the same, it will be a great help for our candidate in the general election because this will even out the playing field.

It’s time to go to their websites, etc. and post like crazy!

This must be done in a way that will encourage their supporters to join in on requesting public campaign financing.

And let’s not forget the Republican candidates. Wouldn’t you like to get some of Mitt’s money off the table?

It’s also time to congratulate John Edwards for agreeing to do this!

GO RON PAUL!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Just what we need - more government money in politics

Are you kidding? Why would we want the government subsidizing elections? That goes against every libertarian and conservative principle out there. It is because of the free-market that we can compete with the big-money candidates. Making special laws that keep establishment candidates in the race at the taxpayer expense is a terrible idea.

http://www.zealfortruth.org

Presidential Election Campaign on 1040

It is taxpayer money.

The way things are now, I'd rather have citizen money from individual donations made on 1040's used in politics rather than money from big business or funny little Hillary men like that Chinese guy with money from who knows where.

This system is far from ideal but it's the best thing we have going at the present time. We have to work with the system we have until changes are made.

If you think that John Smith from small town USA can compete with a monied candidate like Hillary Clinton, you are living in a different reality than I am.

EXPLAINATION

In a statement from the campaign, David Bonior, the campaign manager, said:
“You can’t buy your way to the Democratic nomination – you should have to earn the votes of the American people with bold vision and ideas. This is the most expensive presidential campaign in history, by far. And the simple fact is that the influence of money in politics – and the focus on raising money in this election – has gotten out of control. It’s time to get back to focusing on the issues that matter to the American people. That’s why John Edwards has decided to play by the rules that were designed to ensure fairness in the election process by capping his campaign spending and seeking public financing.”
In the last several weeks, Mr. Edwards has sought to stake considerable ground on the issue of campaign donations, by challenging Senator Clinton to eschew donations from corporate lobbyists. She has refused, although she has expressed her belief in public campaign financing.
To qualify for federal matching funds in the primary cycle, candidates have to prove to the Federal Election Commission that they have raised $5,000 in 20 states with individual donations that don’t exceed 250 — a rule designed as an indicator of broad support and a viable campaign.
If approved, candidates received a match in federal money of $250 from new contributors, — up to $21 million total — as long as they stay within a $50 million spending limit.
The general election fund is a total of $84 million, as long as the candidates don’t raise and spend outside money — a feat that would prove difficult for many of the top money-getters — like Senators Clinton and Obama who have already received a lot of money for the general election cycle. If they decided to opt-in for the general cycle, they would have to return those donations.

I don't understand. What

I don't understand. What does it mean to accept public campaign financing?

Basically, it's a spending cap

Accepting public financing caps the amount you can spend on the campaign but the gov matches what you raise dollar for dollar up to $250/donation.
I don't know what the spending cap is.

In the Last election Bush out spent Kerry partially because Bush refused public funding and thus had no cap. The idea is it'll level the playing field. Thus limiting the influence of the rich and helping those with a large # of donations up to $250 and not help those with fewer large donors. If everyone accepted public funding it would help Dr. Pauls campaign immensely b/c it would negate much of the big money benefits.

I think Dr. Paul is philosophically opposed to limits on campaign contributions.