Nexus: Chapman's Journal of Law and Public Policy

There are many different ways of looking at campaign reform debate. One could probably argue each side zealously with equal points allocated to each viewpoint. One thing I think we can all agree on is that most voters do not take actual responsibility into researching their candidates and making educated decisions; and THIS is what needs the most reform.

Consider a nation whose voters take their job as decision makers of the country seriously and do not vote until they have thoroughly researched each candidate and demanded more from their politicians by doing so. Would it make that much of a difference if a multi-billion dollar company paid for a thirty second commercial for the politician of their choice. The ideal answer would be no. The viewer would know it was no more than a campaign and can only be taken as seriously as the subsequent research done to confirm the information.

This however, would take the voters time and effort, and many voters may not have the resources to do so. It would not be an easy task considering all the opportunities and outlets politicians have to stretch the truth (to put it nicely). Even as I write this, I realize I have no idea where I would start if I were on a quest for the truth about a person. Where would I look? The Internet? How do I find a website that wasn’t either created by the politician themselves, or by an opponent? Is there even such a thing as neutral information about politicians? Is the problem that there is too much “false” information out there, or that there is not enough true and neutral information out there?

Can there ever be such a thing as true information. In most cases, getting information to the public takes money, and that money usually has its own agenda. Therefore, we only hear what that “money” wants to tell us, and as we have seen many times over, money can lead to corruption. However, that “money” has first amendment rights to free speech laid out in the constitution through the person who holds it. Neither the courts nor the legislature can overrule the constitution, however, it does make you wonder how far people can “abuse” their rights before something is done about it.

In the early years of our country, there was a differing of opinion on weather or not the constitution should be easily changed. Jefferson was one of the main advocates for frequent changes in every generation. One of the main reasons behind that view was that Jefferson believed it would keep the general population constantly involved. Although its pretty clear this is not the view that has been adopted, it may not seem like the worst idea now. It seems like Jefferson realized our founding fathers might not have hit on everything since we live in an ever-changing world. While I am in no means saying that we have out grown the right to free speech, it might be wroth while to go back and review what it was actually put into place to protect. Lets face it, this is not a case of making sure an underrepresented group’s voices are heard, this is a case of someone buying their way into a governmental position.

Imagine this scenario in other professions. Say an individual, knowing they were going to need intense medical care at some point in the future, gave a generous donation to a hospital in hopes they use it to purchase the newest equipment in kidney transplants. What would the public say if they then found out that because of this donation, Mr. Donation has now been bumped from number 63 on the kidney transplant list to number 1. I think this situation would definitely outrage many people. But why? Do we know Mr. Donation had an agenda when making such a generous donation to the hospital? Do we know if the hospital made any promises in return for the donation? While the facts may not be identical, the questions we have to ask are similar.

We do not know if politicians seek out the financial assistance by making certain tempting promises to companies they know are going to need governmental backing, or if it goes the other way around. For all we know, it could be totally innocent with neither side having any expectations. Ok, well not really, but the point is that we could debate the issue of campaign finance reform all day, finding pros and cons for both views, but whatever the companies and politicians are doing, the one thing we can all do for now is take on a lot more responsibility as voters. We need to demand more from every politician and make sure we get access to the truth somehow. We need to do our own research and strongly encourage others to do the same. We can all sit and blame the politicians and/or the corporations, or we can make our actions stronger than theirs and try to show them that money will not necessarily equal votes.