Durbin: "If you even knew how much time we spend raising money..."

Yesterday, politicians across the country scurried to call big campaign contributors, begging for last-minute cash before the quarterly reporting period ended at midnight.

Also yesterday, Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) introduced their groundbreaking bill to replace special-interest-funded elections with citizen-funded elections for Congress, so our representatives can spend more time working for the people they're supposed to represent.

And today, Change Congress unveiled a new online "whip count" tool that makes it easy for citizens to call our representatives and demand they support this bill.

The Wall Street crisis was a wake-up call for many people. For years, financial institutions like Bank of America and AIG donated millions to the very people who were supposed to regulate them. The result is obvious.

What's less obvious to some is the solution. But thanks to Durbin, Specter, and a bipartisan array of sponsors in the House, the solution is now staring us in the face.

The Durbin-Specter bill would put in place a new hybrid of public funding plus Obama-style small donations for congressional candidates. Candidates would receive a substantial chunck of funding if they agreed to raise no more than $100 per person. Plus, those small donations would be matched 4 to 1 and be augmented by reduced-cost TV ads.

As I've written before, this proposal has the support of nearly 70% of Americans and would save taxpayers billions of dollars a year, the essence of fiscal responsibility.

In announcing the bill, Senator Durbin said this:

It is much better to spend your time out meeting the people you want to represent...if we spend a little more time with folks who aren't as wealthy, I think it's better for us and for the system.

Plus, we have a big agenda here...if you even knew how much time we spend raising money or talking about raising money or begging people to take national trips to raise money, it's just nothing short of amazing."

We urgently need to pressure Congress to support this reform.

Some current and former Google employees volunteered with Change Congress to help design our new tool, replicating the "whip count" process that congressional leaders use to count votes, but putting this power in your hands instead.

But crowd-sourcing the "whipping" of votes only works if regular people across the country each donate a minute or two to help change their democracy.

Can you take a moment to help whip the vote?

Together, we can Change Congress.

Comments

[PenFighter]

"Plus, those small donations would be matched 4 to 1 and be augmented by reduced-cost TV ads. "

Hidden within this simple statement is a bigger issue. We've watched the "public" airwaves be auctioned off for thousandths of cents on the dollar compared to their true worth to the constantly bigger media conglomerates, and for what: less and less local presence, less and less public service, less and less relevant news? We've watched the Fairness Doctrine be replaced by the "Make Sh*t Up for Your Preferred Candidate" Doctrine.

So, answer me this: Why in the world should the media be paid at all for campaign advertising? That should be their cost of doing business on the PUBLIC airwaves. Isn't it the height of conflict of interest for the media to solicit billions from candidates who will then legislate rules for the media?

Give every candidate who meets basic validity requirements free advertising. Everybody gets the same amount. When you use it up, that's it. It's gone. You can't beg, borrow., buy or steal more.

[Froggie99]

This is the time, this is the wake-up call. Time to reform the election/campaign system to limit amounts that corporations can contribute to election campaigns.
And most importantly, time to LIMIT the actual campaigning period to a few months instead of 2 years.

[historymatters]

glad to find out about this proposed legislation. Thanks!

[RPLinNYC]

Great post and great organization.
Is there an email option for people who want to support Change Congress but
don't have time to go through the hassle with the phone?

Set up a way for people to support this with
one or two clicks. It would bring your numbers in line
with the support that is actually out there.

[historymatters]

do a google search on your representative's or senator's name and the word "contact," and you should find something right away. It's worked for me before.

[Adam Green - Huffpost Blogger]

Yup, here:
http://change-congress.org/join

[Sundialsvc4]

What we have very plainly seen is that the United States Congress can be the accessory to, and the enabler of, financial C-R-I-M-E that has hundreds(!) of millions(!!) of actual victims ... plaintiffs ... in their own country.

This is not something that you "simper and whine" about, proclaiming that somehow "this is just the way things have to be." It isn't.

[maxgen1]

I only wish that the folks who use the public airways (TV & radio) would be required to provide the same amount of free air time to all viable candidates.

And that conflict of interest (voting on issues in which a donor had a financial interest, and issues in which an elected official or his relatives and business associates has a financial interest) would be a felony for elected officials.

And that all candidates would be provided with matching funds so all principal candidates would have an equal amount of money to spend.

And that, after retirement, elected officials would be prevented from financial dealing with elected officials who had supported their interests.

[DesertDogAlpha]

And I wish everyone had the same IQ and work ethic.

My guess is about 99 pct of the people who voted for President Obama had a financial interest in the form of a "middle class tax cut" with that and additional government benefits paid for by others. No one ever seems to talk about taxing all of us to pay for what all of us will get. With 50 percent (the lower half) of taxpayers paying less than 3 percent of income taxes, they have a big financial interest in getting other peoples' money via the government.

[Asmodeus]

That's right man. Go ahead. Blame the peasants for daring to make you take responsibility for the backs you stand on.

First of all, I suppose you have millions? Second of all, if you do, when the expensive tax lawyer is done, what's your REAL percentage of tax? Thirdly, and certainly not least, do you have any idea how this looks?

Like the scene in the wizard of oz, when the curtain is pulled back to reveal an egotistical, power-hungry charlatan. Sure! Run that "Blame the Welfare Queens" game one more time. It won't work anymore. Go away.

[ramblin jack]

3% Where do you live man the planet of nonsense. Who gave you those stats Rushbo. Oh and work ethic I guess scheming and manipulating and lying like the wall street bankers is work ethics. The worker has done as much if not more than all you supposed smart guys for this country and when you whine and cry like babies over taxes that is what?

[DesertDogAlpha]

Ah, the truth. Chuck Schumer, as head of Dem Senate campaign fundraising in 2008 spent so much time at AIG, Goldman Sachs and elsewhere that he never was going to push for them to reform anything. Indeed, he stood in the way of reform as their advocate - home town businesses and all that. And it's paying off for the banks, AIG, etc. Schumer apparently has way more stroke to continue to protect the banks than Carl Levin, for instance, has to protect GM and Chrysler. Go figure.

Change we can believe in - unless the money is needed for a campaign.

[stuporman]

any chance of getting 'truth in advertising' for those ads you mention so we don't get swift boated again?

[seanparnell]

You mean, any chance of getting the government to censor the political speech of those you find troublesome or disagree with their conclusions?

You might want to refresh your understanding of the First Amendment before you go down this path.

Sean Parnell
President
Center for Competitive Politics
http://www.campaignfreedom.org
sparnell@c­ampaignfre­edom.org

[philistine]

Your organization looks like an astroturf group to promote the campaign ad industry. Considering how truly awful most political advertising is, especially the hit pieces and swift-boating, I'm not much inclined to pay attention to your Constituti­on-poundin­g.

[PATina]

What is it EXACTLY that your group is for. I took this from your website.

CCP's mission, through legal briefs, studies, historical and constitutional analyses, and media communication is to educate the public on the actual effects of money in politics, and the results of a more free and competitive electoral process.

I guess what I'd like to know... what role would you (your group) like to see money have in politics?