Indiana

No Limits, Just Full Disclosure

By Abdul Hakim-Shabazz

There is an editorial in the Indianapolis Star today advocating limits on campaign contributions.  The argument is that limits, along with full disclosure, with even the playing field and financially-disadvantaged candidates a better shot at competing.

I have to respectfully disagree with my friends and 300 N. Pennsylvania Avenue.  While I firmly believe in full disclosure, I am not a big fan of limits on campaign contributions.

You should be able to give as much as you want and as many times as you want to the candidate and cause of your choice.  In addition, the politician you give money to should disclose every dime in a timely manner or face a stiff penalty, say half the contribution amount.  It may sound a bit draconian, but it’s the price you pay for a free society.

If a candidate can’t find anyone to support his or her ideas then maybe the candidate needs to go back and rethink their message or strategy.  And remember, money doesn’t guarantee victory, just look at the last Mayor’s race in Indianapolis.

Limiting speech is never good a democracy.  I also think voters are smart enough to realize that if one candidate is getting all his cash from one source (say himself) they will take that into account.  If not,  that’s their own fault for being disengaged.

As the old saying goes, money is the mother’s milk of politics; and skim milk is disgusting.

Full post as published by Indiana Barrister on August 06, 2008 (boomark / email).