THE Presidential debate

[JohnnieRat]

Ron Paul was awesome

[Air]

sorry but I must do this 

[attachthumb=#]

[Luise]

So much money spent on campaigning!
Do you guys have any laws to control who candidates can take money from?
There has been some discussion amongst Australian politicians about this issue, but no real decisions have been made yet.
It sounds like Hilary has spent a lot of money that could have gone to better use.

[JohnnieRat]

There's contribution laws for campaigning but they are confusing... and still leave campaigns open to spend as much money as the pope.

[Telfurion]

There are a few rules for raising money, but very little for spending it.  The main one is hard money vs. soft money.  Soft money being where other organizations spend money for the express purpose of helping one campaign, and hard money being where the actual campaign spends money.  Hard money is strictly regulated, but since soft money isn't, thats where most of the spending comes from.  Although campaign finance reformers want all money spent on a candidate to become hard money, to make it easier to regulate and control.  Imagine the logistical difficulty though in making sure no organizations spend money to further the cause of a particular candidate.

[un4]

They tried to limit soft money, while expanding the amount of hard money available to candidates to make up for some of the loss.  Unfortunately, soft money is so vague that they can pretty much get what they want to spend.

[Shadowwolf]

If you read the laws and desipher them with the secret ring found in the deepest cave guarded by the monkey idols with poison darts and a large boulder that can crush you, the only true limit on campaign funding in this country is blatant corporate sponsorship. Meaning you cant take money from a corporation and in turn use their logo or advertising on your campaign. They can donate to your campaign, but not as a corporation, they need to filter the money through a non-profit end. Basically campaign funding has been turned into legal money laundering for politicians.

[Nixphire]

Well you can see why politicians drag their feet to want to change the laws that they used to get them selves elected. It’s protecting their self interest. Is it “wrong” only if you want a government for The People, and not for interest groups.
Money laundering? (made me lol irl) That's quite an interesting way of calling out 527 groups http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/527_group for you non Americans wanting to know a little bit about them.

[LastDyingBreath]

politicians take bribes donations from corporations and special interests, and then funnel taxpayer money to their masters doors so that all involved can get hugely rich at the expense of the average american.

there, I just saved you American Politics 101.

[Luise]

lol Panzer-
Nix- reading that Wikipedia article on 527 group was an eye opener.
These groups spend insane amounts of money.
We have similar problems- the politiicians happily support the laws that give them more money. Our pollies don't earn that much money (officially that is- I'm not counting overseas trips, expensive dinners, gifts, etc.) but the retirement benefits are amazing.

[Muridin]

Yeah, i agree with Luise about our pollies here. But what is scary to know is the Australian Welfare System rates in the top in the world, and it still sucks for joe bloe.