RoR: Forum

First of all, what would you say if President Obama were in Saudi Arabia gathering money for his campaign? This goes back to the XYZ Affair, really. Why is an American presidential candidate taking money from people in other nations? Whose interests will he serve? Is he gathering money in France and Germany, too? Russia maybe, China? (why not: might has well be honest).

As for Israel, not much can be said for it from an Objectivist point of view. They only move into and out of socialism and crony capitalism of the worst sort. That said, though, they have a vibrant, strong, and deep commitment to pluralist democracy.

The National Democratic Assembly (Balad) is a pro-Arab party that seats a woman delegate now and often has in the past. Similarly, the anti-Zionist New Movement (Meretz) holds three seats, again, one deputy being a woman. You show me an Arab/Islamic state with a parliament (first that much, then) where a Zionist woman holds a seat. So, distancing ourselves from the religious wars of the Middle East, it nonetheless remains that an American politician might say something nice about Israel.

But taking money is wrong.

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 8/01, 11:53am)

Post 1

Wednesday, August 1, 2012 - 6:54pm

Romney should know better than to say anything nice about government health services... like he doesn't have enough problems in that area!!!

As to the money, the major problem isn't that politicians accept money from donors, it's that they have things they can do to reward those donors with latter, if they get elected.

If the powers of elected official were properly limited, they'd have so little to hand out, that there would be few lined up to give them money for a campaign.

In the meantime... If anyone wants to give money to a campaign they can do so secretly through one of those 501C PACs - I don't think there is any legal restriction on who can give to them. Is there any moral right to restrict who can give? Is there any moral right to restrict who a candidate can accept money from? I don't think so.

Better to just focus on what most needs doing, and that is electing those who'll take us closer to a government that must live within the limits of the constitution. That's a real tough goal as it is... trying to fix campaign finance laws along the way is more like an impossible chore in itself AND a distraction.

Post 2

Thursday, August 2, 2012 - 4:20am

Steve, Mitt Romney was in Israel, taking money from Israelis. Is it your position that a properly limited government allows those running for election to be financed by foreigners? If so, I can see the point. Why not have a Chinese Friendship Party candidate, if the powers of state are so limited that little harm can be done... except, of course, to perhaps take Chinese nationals by preference into the FBI and military general staff, and federal judgeships, those all being proper functions of government. How much globalism does capitalism include?

If trade barriers hurt us, and if free trade is the best course, even if other nations subsidize economic entities there, then, does that apply in politics, also? Should elections in America be open to anyone in the world? Perhaps so... but my intuitions are against it and you need to make a case if that is what you advocate.

(I understand that in reality, money may seem anonymous. Candidates anywhere can be financed from anywhere. But, ultimately, money is not truly untraceable. It is an axiom in criminalistics - Locard's Exchange Principle - that every contact leaves a trace. That's what forensic accounting is for. So, the "practical" considerations aside, we are still left with the moral problem of foreign financing of American political candidates.)

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 8/02, 4:35am)

Post 3

Thursday, August 2, 2012 - 5:50am

Michael,

No, I don't like any candidate take money from any special interest that might be a problem down the line. But the difference between the special interest of some Israeli citizens and the special interest of George Soros (now an American citizen) giving money to Obama starts getting real fuzzy. In both cases, we are left with our imaginations trying to predict what improper actions might result from the candidate once elected - trying to evaluate the effect on our country. What a President Romney might do after taking money from Israelis doesn't make me as worried as what a President Obama might do after taking money from Soros. But I don't like either.

We have already seen Obama stuffing the appointed positions from various Soros funded organizations.

I've never claimed that the proper structure would answer all problems. Laws won't be able to solve all problems - not in campaign finance or anywhere else.

People who have areas where they don't respect free association, if elected, can cause harm - what's new about that? That is so now, where we have anthing but a properly limited structure, or at some magical future date where we have a minarchy. The defense of freedom will always rest with an informed, educated public who rise up to fight against any elite that attempts to destroy freedom. Are you going to argue that this can all be made moot with the proper kind of campaign financing laws?

You appear to be mixing up politics and economics in your reference to globalism. We have a national government, with a national jurisdiction, and I see no problems with recognizing that other nations should NOT be able put forth their own candidates or acquire power in our civil structures. Localizing what authority is appropriate to the smallest reasonable geographic area is a good principle.

We both share the intuition that foriegn subsidies of political campaigns are not good. But in your post are you mixing up foreign individuals with foreign nations?

Let me end by saying that your last post totally ignores the what I wrote. I'll repeat it: "Better to just focus on what most needs doing, and that is electing those who'll take us closer to a government that must live within the limits of the constitution. That's a real tough goal as it is... trying to fix campaign finance laws along the way is more like an impossible chore in itself AND a distraction."

Post 4

Thursday, August 2, 2012 - 8:13pm

Steve, I agree; and so I sanctioned your post.
(I hope that doesn't misalign the planets or something.)

Post 5

Friday, August 3, 2012 - 12:14am

Thank you, Michael. I find myself looking up as if the sky itself might come crashing down... but so far, so good :-)

Post 6

Friday, August 10, 2012 - 9:43pm