From: Richard Huddleston <reh@wam.umd.edu>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 03:31:20 +0800
To: vznuri@netcom.com
Subject: Re: Political Cleanup program
Message-ID: <199512181412.JAA08672@exp2.wam.umd.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Detweiler wrote:
* >JB:
* >>Politics is traditionally corrupt, it appears, because donors to politicians
* >>and political campaigns expect a quid pro quo for their donations.  Various
* >>unsatisfactory solutions include campaign spending limits, etc.
* >
* >I have an unusual view that I've never seen elsewhere: the problem with
* >our government is not that money or PACs are involved, but that the system
* >does not handle or resolve the conflicts between them very well. in other
* >words, in contrary to the current view that all PACs are evil, I think the
* >problem is not that we have PACs, but that our current system does not
* >balance their demands in some sensible manner.  the system is
* >susceptible to corruption. it is conceivable however that there would be
* >a system that involves money and politics but still avoids corruption.

Not to sound like a dupe or anything, but every time I get discouraged
at the rampant mealyism of our political system I go read the first
couple of paragraphs of a text from GOVT 101.  There, I get reminded that
the way most political debate is handled elsewhere is with bullets.

Personally, I welcome a complete equity between all lobbyists seeking to
obtain a politico's ear.  Take the money out of the equation, and let the
merits of their causes, if any, stand on their own. 

Happy holidays,

Richard