And Independent's thoughts on cleaning up the election process

There are indeed problems with the current system of nominating and electing congress people and presidents. I don’t believe it is possible, under our constitution, to eliminate parties, nor do I think it is necessary. Most candidates don’t get their money from the party but from various fund raising sources. The party will put money into races which are crucial and where the amount of money the party can spend might make the difference in an election.

The big problem is the sources of the money used in campaigns and it’s relationship to lobbyists.

At the present time a candidate must accept money from sources I’d just as soon they did not in order to get elected. Whether that is from oil companies, drug companies, the banking/insurance industry or what, the large, moneyed, interest groups today finance our political campaigns. They frequently finance both sides in the campaign so they will be insured access and influence regardless of who gets elected. Obviously, they don’t care about the nation or very much about who gets elected as long as they retain their influence!

Any politician who has accepted money in order to get elected and is later lobbied by that industry must feel obligated to give the industry’s view point a lot of consideration at the very least. There were over 1000 lobbyists working on the Medicare Part D plan, representing the insurance/drug interests in that matter. Guess how many were working back there to represent what I think and want! That’s right - zip! So who is the good senator/representative going to be most concerned about? That’s right again - and it’s not me!

Now, how do we eliminate this patently non democratic influence in what is supposedly our congress? Public financing of campaigns would be a nice start but is complicated by the free speech clause. This is a matter which would ultimately be decided in the supreme court and this stacked court might well see any restriction as unconstitutional. It should be noted that there are limitations on free speech as shown by the liable laws and the fact you cannot yell "fire" in a crowded theater unless there is a fire!

Another factor to consider would be that the constitutional guarantee extends to citizens of the United States. I see nothing in the constitution that defines multinational corporate conglomerates, big unions, think tanks, or any other kind of organization as a "citizen." It is my belief that limiting the "rights" of these entities might well stand up to a constitutional challenge.

None of this precludes a rich person from running TV adds or other advertising to promote or denigrate any one person or party they wish. I don’t personally have an answer to that and I’m not wanting to amend the US constitution for anything other than to eliminate the electoral college, our biggest archaic monstrosity! However, any advertising done by swift boaters would either be done by them as a collection of individuals, and therefore subject to slander suits personally, or it would not be done.

I don’t know if these are the answers, part of the answer, completely off base or what but I do know that we need to return the congress to the people or risk losing our democratic republic as we have known it. The average Joe just cannot bring the money to the table to be represented by his supposed representative or senator and the system has been totally corrupted by money!

If you have thoughts on this, share them with me!