Thursday, March 19, 2015

A Different Way to Takle Money in Politics

A lot of people are commenting on the fact that President Obama said this yesterday in Ohio:
President Barack Obama on Wednesday suggested that if American voters want to “counteract” the role of money in politics, it may be worth making voting mandatory.

“It would be transformative if everybody voted,” Obama said during a town hall event in Cleveland, Ohio. “That would counteract (campaign) money more than anything. If everybody voted, then it would completely change the political map in this country.”
What is interesting to me about this is not only the idea of mandatory voting as a way to counteract recent efforts by Republicans to restrict voting (which is the angle a lot of commentators took) but the President's stated reason for contemplating the idea - its affect on money in politics.

It strikes me that for too long progressives have focused only on legislative fixes to limit the role of money in politics. It's not that I would abandon those possibilities. But one thing I've always appreciated about President Obama is that he's clearly thinking creatively about other ways to tackle the problem.

What I see from this President is not so much an attempt to limit how much rich people spend on campaigns (although he has made clear statements against the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United) - but to engage the grass roots in a way that makes their money less relevant. He did that in his 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns by raising millions of dollars in small donations. That success will be one of his most significant legacies.

Now he's planting the seed of an idea that if everyone voted, it could counteract the role of money in politics. That - my friends - is a community organizer at work.

1 comment:

  1. "Now he's planting the seed of an idea that if everyone voted, it could counteract the role of money in politics." Agreed--the vote is the most powerful means of change. It is a right we all have (and for many of us, a right that many fought and died for only fifty years ago). It is clear that the GOP has been moving to destroy the right to vote for many, since they cannot win if all of us vote.

    With that in mind, it's a damned shame to see so many progressives run to the "I'm not voting because (add the various reasons)!!" Even though they have to know that it will only lead to more GOP victories and more suffering, they still carry on with it. Perhaps they can, since no one is going to take away their right to vote--I'm looking at you, Michael Moore, Chris Hedges, and Melissa Beatty. Instead, their solution is to "occupy" and wave signs. Or they fall back on the "both parties are the same" excuse--even though that line of thinking should have been blown to bits during the George W. Bush administration (and since 1968, to be fair).


On the Supreme Court, Ingraham Says the Quiet Part Out Loud

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Dobbs vs Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The case pits the one remaining aborti...