Jackson on Big spending

For the politicians that are “Big spenders” this recent allegation could mean cracking down on spending. In a recent article I found that a house candidate is accusing a rival candidate of “Big spending.” To some this may seem like a new issue but big spending has been going on for some time. The American publics’ eyes were closed to this through loop holes in the system, like benefits or contributories. Candidates need basically one tool to campaign and campaign effectively and that’s money, some research was done with the presidential primaries and the researchers found that Sen. Obama “Raised” more money in one month than Howard Dean raised in 14 months. People need to realize yes a good portion of this money comes from fundraising and things of that nature but the other part comes from loop holes. A lot of politicians were once lawyers so they know the system, how it works, and the loop holes to go in when it comes to particular situations. If the federal government is serious about cracking down on candidate spending then they need to look far back into the roots of America. Big spending has really gotten out of hand in the past few decades and if the candidates stay on the same path they are on we could see bribes and maybe even hits made on other candidates. The federal government really needs to start cracking down on these things or pretty soon like as in a few decades from now we could have absolute chaos when it comes to elections.

Democrats seek compromise on Michigan, Florida delegates

This article is very well written and provides numerous facts and information useful in the up coming elections. In the article it states, "I'm going to let the leadership of both states see what they think is the best approach," she said. "I think it would be a grave disservice to the voters of Florida and Michigan to adopt any process that would disenfranchise anyone, and I'm still committed to seating their delegations, and I know that they're working with the Democratic Party to determine how best to proceed." Well of course Sen. Clinton is going to let the leadership of both states see what the best approach is because she won both states so far. Do I think they should campaign again in those two states, yes because it’s the states fault they held their primaries in January and no the national party shouldn’t pay the voting cost. Why? Because like I said it’s not the democrats’ fault that the states held their primaries early. It also talked about how much money the candidates raised, Sen. Obama raised over 55 million dollars in one month and Clinton raised 36 million. Obama has the upper hand in that because he can now use that extra money he has over Clinton to advertise and to further use campaigning methods. The article gave us a little blurb of information it said that Obama raised that money in the shortest month of the year and Howard Dean back in 2004 raised 59 million in 14 months. That shows people are either more involved this time or they just don’t want to see another Clinton run for president. As I states earlier this is a very will written article and shouldn’t be looked over, here is the url link http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/03/07/0307campaign.html read this article it isn’t obnoxiously long and it will give you a lot of information.