For me, a lot of all this comes down to a pretty basic question: Do we (as a people, as voters) want money to be the determinative factor in politics? Do we want a system where public service is given lip service, but cold hard cash is the lifeblood that makes things move? Are people really ready to embrace a system where idealists are seen as suckers, and only those willing to exchange favors (and other valuables) are able to get things done?
And if so, what, exactly, is likely to get done?
Let me state again: None of what follows is (so far as I know) illegal. But does it leave you feeling good about the system, legal or not?
Going back to the previous post...Why is it that Candidate Y, who is running for Benton County Commissioner, and was seeking the endorsement of the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, wound up being interviewed in Dan Rayfield's office? What are we to make of the fact that the person interviewing Candidate Y, Harry Demarest, has no official connection to the OLCV at all? Is there significance to the fact that Demarest and Pat Malone are friends? What's the connection between Rayfield, Demarest, Malone and the OLCV?
Could it be...money? In various amounts, and at various times, money has flowed back and forth between all those players over the years. Demarest has given Rayfield thousands of dollars over the years. The OLCV has given money to Rayfield. The OLCV has endorsed Rayfield. Demarest has given a fair share of money to Annabelle Jaramillo, the sitting Benton County Commissioner who has, yes, endorsed Pat Malone. Pat Malone has been endorsed by the OLCV. 'Round and 'round we go...
It's a tight, seemingly Invitation Only club, and the ones frozen out currently are any and all candidates not named Pat Malone. All legal, to be sure, and all very, very clubby and exclusive. Once again, I am so glad I'm not running as a Democrat.
Now, again, I know you have to spend some money to run a political campaign, even a smaller one. I have a budget for my campaign this year, and I'm looking at spending around $2,000, total. I intend to donate half of that myself, and then raise the other half. For me, it's more important to spend smart than it is to spend big. I've run for office once in my life, and I was outspent by my opponent by at least ten-to-one, if not more.
I won.
(Oh, and I won as a progressive environmentalist in a community that trends Republican.)
Anyway, as we head into election season, it's not unusual to get your funding in order. Pat Malone certainly has. For one thing, he gave his own campaign a whopping $7,000 last November. That alone would explain all the expensive lawn signs, buttons, brochures, photos, stickers, etc. that the Malone campaign has been distributing since last year. It's more than obvious that Pat is planning to spend big on his campaign.
But, more interestingly, Pat has been raising money through his campaign committee for years. As in, even in off years, non-election years. And big, big chunks of that money have been coming from out of state. I don't know who Norman Zoref (self-employed) of Long Beach, California is, but he's been very generous to Pat Malone, giving him $500 in February of 2014, $1,000 in April of 2015, and another $500 in November of 2017. Raoul Enriquez (not employed) of Seattle, Washington is also pretty generous, giving Pat $300 in March of 2015, another $300 in April of 2016, and then upping his game to $400 in July of 2017. (He's also had other generous out of state donors as well, many in the same $300 to $500 range.)
Please note how most of those donations came in during non-election years. And please understand these are only the larger, out of state donations - I haven't gone into the thousands of dollars pouring in from local sources, in non-election years. Why would someone want to raise so much money in off years when they're nowhere near running for office? Could it be that fresh flowing cash is required to get into that exclusive, clubby club mentioned above?
Let's kind of flip that question over, shall we, and look at all this cash catching activity another way. Does all this money chasing and swapping leave you feeling like ideals and the power of good ideas and a commitment to public service are driving the process? Benton County isn't that big; should it really take spending tens of thousands of dollars to run for County Commissioner?
Allow me to repeat myself: I ran for office before, and got wildly outspent, and won. Why? Because I had better ideas and more energy than my opponent. I don't like to waste money. And a great deal of campaign spending is a total waste of money. But, with the disconnection it engenders, it also proves to be a great waste and withering of democracy. Buy ads! More lawn signs! More and bigger signs! More bigger more! Don't even bother trying to raise people's hopes or expectations - just bludgeon them down with lawn signs, buttons, brochures, etc. If you can't inspire, you might still be able to make a majority of voters comply. At least that's the thinking.
As a strategy, I find that pretty lacking - on every level. If you keep a campaign lean and, in the best way, cheap, it forces you to be active, to work, to listen. You earn votes, rather than trying to buy them. That's the model I embrace. Less fund raising, and more consciousness raising. Less spending, and a lot more spending of time with voters, hearing what they have to say.
I've already spent probably a couple hundred hours actively seeking out and listening to people. And I haven't spent even a hundred cents to do so. Sure, I will eventually spend some money, and I will do some fundraising. But even that can be done in a creative, progressive way that embodies public service.
I'll have more on that later. For now, I just urge you to think about the ramifications of having a political system that is so dependent on chasing cash. This isn't really about Pat Malone, or anyone else named here. It's about the system. Does it make you feel proud, or a little ill? Do we just accept it as the price of, well, doing business, I guess...or do we aspire to something more responsive, accountable and meaningful?
In the end, do we stand together, united as citizens, or do we all just submit to living in the shadow of Citizens United?
And if so, what, exactly, is likely to get done?
Let me state again: None of what follows is (so far as I know) illegal. But does it leave you feeling good about the system, legal or not?
Going back to the previous post...Why is it that Candidate Y, who is running for Benton County Commissioner, and was seeking the endorsement of the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, wound up being interviewed in Dan Rayfield's office? What are we to make of the fact that the person interviewing Candidate Y, Harry Demarest, has no official connection to the OLCV at all? Is there significance to the fact that Demarest and Pat Malone are friends? What's the connection between Rayfield, Demarest, Malone and the OLCV?
Could it be...money? In various amounts, and at various times, money has flowed back and forth between all those players over the years. Demarest has given Rayfield thousands of dollars over the years. The OLCV has given money to Rayfield. The OLCV has endorsed Rayfield. Demarest has given a fair share of money to Annabelle Jaramillo, the sitting Benton County Commissioner who has, yes, endorsed Pat Malone. Pat Malone has been endorsed by the OLCV. 'Round and 'round we go...
It's a tight, seemingly Invitation Only club, and the ones frozen out currently are any and all candidates not named Pat Malone. All legal, to be sure, and all very, very clubby and exclusive. Once again, I am so glad I'm not running as a Democrat.
Now, again, I know you have to spend some money to run a political campaign, even a smaller one. I have a budget for my campaign this year, and I'm looking at spending around $2,000, total. I intend to donate half of that myself, and then raise the other half. For me, it's more important to spend smart than it is to spend big. I've run for office once in my life, and I was outspent by my opponent by at least ten-to-one, if not more.
I won.
(Oh, and I won as a progressive environmentalist in a community that trends Republican.)
Anyway, as we head into election season, it's not unusual to get your funding in order. Pat Malone certainly has. For one thing, he gave his own campaign a whopping $7,000 last November. That alone would explain all the expensive lawn signs, buttons, brochures, photos, stickers, etc. that the Malone campaign has been distributing since last year. It's more than obvious that Pat is planning to spend big on his campaign.
But, more interestingly, Pat has been raising money through his campaign committee for years. As in, even in off years, non-election years. And big, big chunks of that money have been coming from out of state. I don't know who Norman Zoref (self-employed) of Long Beach, California is, but he's been very generous to Pat Malone, giving him $500 in February of 2014, $1,000 in April of 2015, and another $500 in November of 2017. Raoul Enriquez (not employed) of Seattle, Washington is also pretty generous, giving Pat $300 in March of 2015, another $300 in April of 2016, and then upping his game to $400 in July of 2017. (He's also had other generous out of state donors as well, many in the same $300 to $500 range.)
Please note how most of those donations came in during non-election years. And please understand these are only the larger, out of state donations - I haven't gone into the thousands of dollars pouring in from local sources, in non-election years. Why would someone want to raise so much money in off years when they're nowhere near running for office? Could it be that fresh flowing cash is required to get into that exclusive, clubby club mentioned above?
Let's kind of flip that question over, shall we, and look at all this cash catching activity another way. Does all this money chasing and swapping leave you feeling like ideals and the power of good ideas and a commitment to public service are driving the process? Benton County isn't that big; should it really take spending tens of thousands of dollars to run for County Commissioner?
Allow me to repeat myself: I ran for office before, and got wildly outspent, and won. Why? Because I had better ideas and more energy than my opponent. I don't like to waste money. And a great deal of campaign spending is a total waste of money. But, with the disconnection it engenders, it also proves to be a great waste and withering of democracy. Buy ads! More lawn signs! More and bigger signs! More bigger more! Don't even bother trying to raise people's hopes or expectations - just bludgeon them down with lawn signs, buttons, brochures, etc. If you can't inspire, you might still be able to make a majority of voters comply. At least that's the thinking.
As a strategy, I find that pretty lacking - on every level. If you keep a campaign lean and, in the best way, cheap, it forces you to be active, to work, to listen. You earn votes, rather than trying to buy them. That's the model I embrace. Less fund raising, and more consciousness raising. Less spending, and a lot more spending of time with voters, hearing what they have to say.
I've already spent probably a couple hundred hours actively seeking out and listening to people. And I haven't spent even a hundred cents to do so. Sure, I will eventually spend some money, and I will do some fundraising. But even that can be done in a creative, progressive way that embodies public service.
I'll have more on that later. For now, I just urge you to think about the ramifications of having a political system that is so dependent on chasing cash. This isn't really about Pat Malone, or anyone else named here. It's about the system. Does it make you feel proud, or a little ill? Do we just accept it as the price of, well, doing business, I guess...or do we aspire to something more responsive, accountable and meaningful?
In the end, do we stand together, united as citizens, or do we all just submit to living in the shadow of Citizens United?
No comments:
Post a Comment