Are some of people that got us into this mess trying to buy the next election?

United States
August 28, 2010 1:21pm CST
Hedge fund managers that played a large role in the current economic crisis are not spending unlimited amounts of money to put GOP candidates into office. Paul Singer, a hedge fund manager, and the biggest source of money to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has made it his mission to elect republicans that support his views. The recent Supreme Court ruling has allowed him to give more money than ever, $4 Million already this year, all coming from his $17 Billion dollar hedge fund he manages. How do you feel about people with unlimited amounts of money using this to buy influence?
2 people like this
7 responses
@trruk1 (1028)
• United States
28 Aug 10
Hedge fund managers induced Congress (and the IRS) to tax their income as capital gains, rather than regular income. It saves them a ton of money in taxes. Of course they want to keep it that way. These are guys who would rather spend a million dollars on accountants, lawyers, and campaign contributions than pay $200,000 more in taxes. As long as Congress is ruled by campaign money, guys like that will be protected.
2 people like this
• United States
29 Aug 10
I couldn't agree with you more. I think that we need to reform our election system before it destroys the country
1 person likes this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
28 Aug 10
they always have been, now they just dont have to worry about hiding it....
• United States
29 Aug 10
Very true
@Adoniah (7513)
• United States
29 Aug 10
I think that there should be a monetary spending limit put on each candidate. For a National Candidate: X Amount for National TV Commercials X Amount for Radio X Amount for Travel X " " Newspapers X " " Mailing Fliers Signs etc. The same Idea goes for local and state Candidates If this could be honed to a fine edge, it would take a lot of Candidate "Buying" out of the picture. Something like this is done in other countries. It is unbelievable how much some folks spend to "Buy" their office.
@Adoniah (7513)
• United States
30 Aug 10
Oh I know that here in the states it is nothing but a pipe dream. It might work in some places if it was started at the lower levels and then worked its way up. One is allowed one's fantasies.... Shalom~Adoniah
• United States
29 Aug 10
I couldn't agree more, but the problem is getting all of the politicians to accept this, and the people that buy them.
@dboman (457)
• United States
29 Aug 10
I support the first amendment.
• United States
29 Aug 10
Please show me where in the first amendment does it say that you have the right to purchase elected officials?
@dboman (457)
• United States
29 Aug 10
Please show me the conversations between the "rich" and the politicians that prove because the "rich" person donates to a politician that the politician will then do everything that "rich" person says. Furthermore, please tell me where in the Constitution does it state that the government has the right to regulate campaign contributions. Or is it OK to sway from the Constitution because you don't like who's donating to whom? Also, how come I never see you complain about the fact that the federal government has spent billions in bailing out the unions...who will in turn spend hundreds of millions on DNC politician's campaigns?
@dboman (457)
• United States
29 Aug 10
So, one incident nearly a decade ago means that every person/corporation who donates to a politician is "buying" them? As far as the Constitution, we're talking about two different things. The Constitution limits what the government can do, not what people can do...the legislative branch does that quite well already. The difference between bailing out unions and the contractor situation? Not much. But you're the one who started a discussion about campaign finances.
@artistry (4152)
• United States
29 Aug 10
...Hi there, Greatdebater, Of course to answer your question. But as we all know this had gone on for a long, long time both sides take money from all over. But the Roberts Court did an immense bit of shifting the tables so that more money could go toward making sure the people who would do their bidding would get into office if they filled their pockets. A corporation is now as a result of that ruling, trying to run to have a seat in the House of Representatives. So we will have Representative Microsoft and Representative Xerox sitting as leaders of the country. It's very much a case of the money will rule. Not that it hasn't before but this is quite absurd. The Wall Street titans are boycotting the Dems as far as money goes because of the new financial regulations which really did not go far enough. But they want to have their way so that they can do anything without any rules being applied to their shenanigans. We need another Supreme Court Justice to be appointed soon, maybe two, Ginsberg is said to be ailing so maybe three. This is a travesty to say the least. Congress was supposed to do something to modify the ruling but so far nothing I have heard address the situation. Take care.
@dboman (457)
• United States
29 Aug 10
It seems you have forgotten Representative SEIU, representative UAW, representative Soros, etc.
@artistry (4152)
• United States
29 Aug 10
....nooooo dboman I haven't forgotten. But I think this takes it a step beyond, wouldn't you say? With unlimited amounts being dropped in the coffers for control? There was no specification to corporations prior to this ruling, democracy even as pitiful as it was has taken a blow to the head with this turn of events. Cheers.
@artistry (4152)
• United States
29 Aug 10
......Here, here! And the fact that the majority of the people in the country are so busy trying to make ends meet, do not care or are not interested so much so that they didn't even realize what had happened is quite sad. We as citizens need to take an interest in what will be controlling our lives in many ways. But it may be just a bit late for any responsible change for many years. It is a chaotic mess in a way. Take it easy.
• Thailand
29 Aug 10
Xã h?i là nhu th?, không công b?ng !
@Adoniah (7513)
• United States
30 Aug 10
Nice! Now aagain in English?
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
29 Aug 10
Why are you acting as though this is something new? Did you forget that the Democrats are in their pockets as well? Take a nice complete look at their campaign contributions and I'm sure you'll see plenty going to big names on the left. Democrats like Chris Dodd and Obama are both fully bought and paid for by these guys.
• United States
29 Aug 10
Taskr, I agree 100% that these elected officials are bought and paid for. You would think that these guys would be smart enough to hide what they are doing. But, the new Fin Reg is really hurting these hedge funds getting rid of their 2 and 20. These guys would actually have to live on only a few hundred million a year, instead of the BILLIONS some of these guys were making. Please forgive me if I don't cry for them!!!