Comments on: For Sale: One Political Office http://www.eyeonannapolis.net/2010/01/21/for-sale-one-political-office/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=for-sale-one-political-office ...it's about the quality of life! Tue, 22 May 2012 14:07:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Merry O'Brien http://www.eyeonannapolis.net/2010/01/21/for-sale-one-political-office/comment-page-1/#comment-2282 Merry O'Brien Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:32:52 +0000 http://www.eyeonannapolis.net/?p=5367#comment-2282 Whoa. While we were discussing this just yesterday, the Supreme Court was doing something disastrous for America on the federal, state, and local level: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/21/AR2010012104482.html "For more than a century, Congress has recognized the danger of letting corporations use their wealth to wield undue influence in political campaigns. The Supreme Court had upheld these efforts. But Thursday, making a mockery of some justices' pretensions to judicial restraint, the Supreme Court unnecessarily and wrongly ruled 5 to 4 that the constitutional guarantee of free speech means that corporations can spend unlimited sums to help elect favored candidates or defeat those they oppose. This, as the dissenting justices wrote, "threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the nation." Whoa. While we were discussing this just yesterday, the Supreme Court was doing something disastrous for America on the federal, state, and local level:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/21/AR2010012104482.html

“For more than a century, Congress has recognized the danger of letting corporations use their wealth to wield undue influence in political campaigns. The Supreme Court had upheld these efforts. But Thursday, making a mockery of some justices’ pretensions to judicial restraint, the Supreme Court unnecessarily and wrongly ruled 5 to 4 that the constitutional guarantee of free speech means that corporations can spend unlimited sums to help elect favored candidates or defeat those they oppose. This, as the dissenting justices wrote, “threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the nation.”

]]> By: Merry O'Brien http://www.eyeonannapolis.net/2010/01/21/for-sale-one-political-office/comment-page-1/#comment-2275 Merry O'Brien Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:23:59 +0000 http://www.eyeonannapolis.net/?p=5367#comment-2275 Go Judd! Also, someone who's good at getting those small donations from local voters might be good at constituent services (being responsive and understanding people's needs in the community) and inspiring people to participate in politics, which is always a good thing (from either camp). Fundraising requires getting to know people. Early raisers have already started getting to know the community. (I know I'm a cheesy optimist). It might be good if all campaigns were publicly funded and spending capped though. Go Judd! Also, someone who’s good at getting those small donations from local voters might be good at constituent services (being responsive and understanding people’s needs in the community) and inspiring people to participate in politics, which is always a good thing (from either camp). Fundraising requires getting to know people. Early raisers have already started getting to know the community. (I know I’m a cheesy optimist). It might be good if all campaigns were publicly funded and spending capped though.

]]> By: Judd Legum http://www.eyeonannapolis.net/2010/01/21/for-sale-one-political-office/comment-page-1/#comment-2274 Judd Legum Thu, 21 Jan 2010 20:46:59 +0000 http://www.eyeonannapolis.net/?p=5367#comment-2274 John: I can say definitively being an effective fundraiser does not necessarily make you the best candidate. The fundraising report can tell you a little something, however, about the candidate. For example, 85% of my donations were under $100, I did not accept any money from PACs and I received over 120 individual contributions from within District 30. This reflects my intention to bring fresh approach to the State House as the Delegate from District 30, without undue influence from special interests. Best, Judd John:

I can say definitively being an effective fundraiser does not necessarily make you the best candidate.

The fundraising report can tell you a little something, however, about the candidate.

For example, 85% of my donations were under $100, I did not accept any money from PACs and I received over 120 individual contributions from within District 30.

This reflects my intention to bring fresh approach to the State House as the Delegate from District 30, without undue influence from special interests.

Best,

Judd

]]>