This Page

has been moved to new address

Campaign Monetary Reform: Changing FCC & Media Rules

Sorry for inconvenience...

Redirection provided by Blogger to WordPress Migration Service
Bloviating Zeppelin: Campaign Monetary Reform: Changing FCC & Media Rules

Bloviating Zeppelin

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Friday, May 08, 2009

Campaign Monetary Reform: Changing FCC & Media Rules

As I recently wrote, directly due to overall disappointment with the Republican Party, some persons are advocating the creation of a Third Party.

But even before we consider any kind of third, fourth or fifth major party, we must somehow wrestle with the vast amounts of money necessary to run various political campaigns, on each of these levels:
  • Local (city, county, etc.)
  • State
  • Federal
Most everyone insists there is little if any real solution to this problem: the fantastic, corruptive amounts of cash necessary to run everything from the most minimal of competitive political races on up to the federal level -- is relativistically staggering.

I submit: by the time anyone -- and I mean anyone (with so damned few exceptions!) -- has reached a national level they are so completely subsumed with corruption that they primarily exist to play the system for their personal, sole benefit.

How we can bring reality and proportion back into the political equation on every level, for -- I submit -- isn't this our ultimate goal?

Further, how do we attract those persons who have stellar ideas, who have the requisite training, education and experience to compete in politics -- but yet exist on a fiscal level far below that necessary to even throw their hat into any political ring?

I also suggest that each and every one of us know persons who could Make A Difference -- if only they could "compete" and if only we could level political campaign playing fields.

Which is why I propose this solution:

Make our national and local media, by way of the FCC PSA (Public Service Announcement) mandate, serve as the primary medium of information for political candidate dissemination.

In other words, make the media that try on so many levels to be "biased" or "contained" or "limited" in their actual coverage of various political endeavors -- to be actually RESPONSIBLE, within fiscal reason, for the broadcast of candidates' statements, platforms, debates, prior to an election.

Level the playing field. Make everyone equal. Isn't this the ultimate goal of the Demorats and Leftists?

And oh, how they'll howl at my suggestion.

As will the various media outlets involved from television to radio.

At this point most PSAs are broadcast on Sunday when fewer people are listening and these media outlets can still fulfill their mandates. Broadcasting PSAs on Sunday is the standard because media outlets know that the fewest number of persons are listening or watching and yet, at the same time, they are fulfilling their obligations.

I submit this, then, for your consideration:

When political issues emerge on any one of the three above levels (local, state, federal), local and national broadcasters, dependent upon the venue, both radio and television (and their cable variants) are OBLIGATED to provide a certain and specifically delineated amount of FREE TIME -- equal for everyone -- devoted to the expression of candidates' views, debates, platforms, solicitations.

The more we can reduce the publicity stress, the more we can level the playing field on every side, the more fair our politics become for those with new, unique, uncorruptible, altruistic and philosophical views.

On both sides of the aisle.

What do you think?



Blogger Three Score and Ten or more said...

I spent a fair amount of time during my innocent youth working in radio. From my experience, I am dubious about the success of your proposal. ONe of the main reasons is that politics is the mother's milk of station income and giving PSA to anything that would bring in bucks would be hard. On the other hand, it might just darn work because they wouldn't know where to go with it.

Thu May 07, 09:37:00 PM PDT  
Anonymous WMD_Maker said...

Letting the MSM be the one to release this stuff is not workable its in their defective genes to be biased. I think there should be a time limit like NO CAMPAIGNING more than 2 monthes before a NATIONAL primary held in May or June or OCTOBER, spending cap on campaigns, make PACs illegal, put a cap on actual monetary contributions. If someone really believes in a candidate and has maxed out the cash contribution amount he/she/it is more than welcome to go knock on doors or drive the candidate around in the backers personal vehicle at the backers TAXABLE expense.

Fri May 08, 09:11:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Carlisleboy said...

I say just kick out the bastards that have no balls to stand up to the Obamanation!!

Fri May 08, 11:22:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Always On Watch said...

The more we can reduce the publicity stress, the more we can level the playing field on every side, the more fair our politics become for those with new, unique, uncorruptible, altruistic and philosophical views.Sounds reasonable to me.

But the media, in the pocket for the leftists, won't play by the rules.

Fri May 08, 04:52:00 PM PDT  
Blogger A Jacksonian said...

The main problem is that the State apparatus has been rigged against third parties by the 1911 move to limit the size of the House, thus increasing district population. The two parties in many of the States put in provisos to get certain amounts of people State-wide (again not all States but many) and in a few that has changed to a certain number PER DISTRICT. New York is one of those, and any real third party that is more than just a funding mechanism from the two major ones to flood the field with their candidates (nifty trick - start a third party that is made up of members of one of the two existing ones and votes with its parent party, but attempts to split votes from the other major party on certain issues).

Any third party that tries to start up will face this and either be frustrated and co-opted (the usual course of 'oh lets just offer a few of your programs and forget how you got to them) or generally fizzle. Doing that at the State level circumvents any federal attempt to deal with it.

At this point to 'change the system' you have to demolish it and start over.

That law setting the size of the House, and the two Amendments allowing different proportions on income tax and making Senatorial selections something taken out of the Statehouse are the three most corrupting influences the Progressives put in. And they intended that none of them actually help the people of the Nation, and all of them would vest more power in DC. It is that Progressive attitude that is at the heart of the rot. To change two of them requires an Amendment and the third an act of Congress... or an Amendment setting the size of the house as a fixed proportion and let the number of members rise and fall with population.

We now have very efficient government just like everyone always wanted.

It is no longer a Republic utilizing a representative democracy...

Fri May 08, 06:00:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Alaska Steve said...

I have to admit I have had no good, workable ideas to fix the way campaigns are conducted. I am too trusting, and every time I greet a new election like a present under the tree on Christmas morning, but as the process grinds on, and is inevitably reduced to what is essentially a few primates sitting around chronically masturbating and throwing their own feces at each other . . . .

Sat May 09, 01:15:00 AM PDT  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home