ap

Skip to content
Supporters of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump wait in the audience for his arrival at the Suffolk County Republican Committee fundraising reception on April 14 in Patchogue, N.Y.
Supporters of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump wait in the audience for his arrival at the Suffolk County Republican Committee fundraising reception on April 14 in Patchogue, N.Y.
PUBLISHED: | UPDATED:
Getting your player ready...

Picking up where I left off in my April 3 column (), let’s deconstruct other unrealistic, idealistic, naive or simply unconstitutional populist declarations heard in this presidential campaign.

“We must shut down those selfish K-Street lobbyists who corrupt the legislative process.” Uh-uh; can’t and shouldn’t do that. The First Amendment protects the right of the people to “petition government.” That’s what lobbyists do. They seek to influence legislators, bureaucrats and presidents to enact laws or policies desired by the people they represent. Some lobbyists favor some things that some other lobbyists oppose. James Madison saw this as an unavoidable, offsetting multiplicity of factions.

Progressives support those who lobby for liberal causes, groups such as industrial labor unions, teacher unions, government employees associations, gun-controllers, radical enviros, the ACLU, welfare-rights activists, plaintiffs’ attorneys, the NAACP, La Raza, NOW, Planned Parenthood, any number of liberal think tanks, etc. They demonize those who lobby for conservative causes as “special interests.” The bigger and more intrusive government gets, the more lobbying there will be either in self-defense or to grab a share of the goodies.

“We must eliminate the corrupting influence of money in politics.” Wrong again, and it’s not necessarily corrupting. In its 2010 Citizens United vs. FEC ruling, the Supreme Court struck down, as an unconstitutional abridgement of free speech, a major portion of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law forbidding corporations and unions from running ads about candidates and issues in the final 30 days before an election. While still prohibiting direct campaign contributions to candidates, the court ruled that other corporate and union spending supporting or opposing federal candidates cannot be limited. Incumbent politicians have a huge advantage over their political challengers in reaching the public at no cost. The mass media, still overwhelmingly dominated by liberals, have great influence in shaping public opinion on issues and candidates. Money is essential to level the playing field.

“Politicians sell their souls to campaign contributors.” Some may. I don’t have a practical remedy other than to not vote for such people. But most politicians have no need to sell their souls. Money from organizations or individuals advancing their preferred issues naturally flows in support of politicians who agree with them. If you, as a politician, are a Second Amendment defender and already believe in an individual right to bear arms, you haven’t “sold your soul” if you accept a contribution from the NRA.

PACs and 527 organizations legally spend far more money on ads supporting or opposing candidates than what’s allowed in direct contributions to a candidate’s campaign. None of that independent spending is within the control of candidates.

“I’ll balance the budget by eliminating fraud, waste and abuse.” Nonsense. FW&A is nickels and dimes in the scope of federal spending. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, a host of “entitlement” programs and interest on the national debt are designated as “mandatory” programs. (One of the more efficient things government does is redistribute income from taxpayers to others on the receiving end of those programs.) What the government terms “payments for individuals” accounts for 71 percent of the $4 trillion of federal spending this year. And most of this is on auto-pilot, legislated in perpetuity. That’s the elephant in the room that will eventually bankrupt us if not reined in.

Donald Trump has offered nothing to deal with this and Bernie Sanders pledges to spend even more. Add spending for national defense and you’re at 85 percent of the budget. Fending off trillion-dollar deficits projected by the Congressional Budget Office in future years will require much stronger medicine than glib claims about FW&A.

This is a pivotal presidential election. Beware of unqualified candidates who pander to your anger and frustration with grandiose and simplistic promises that ignore reality. They’ll make things worse, not better.

Mike Rosen is a KOA News Radio personality.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit or check out our for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

RevContent Feed

More in ap