 |
| He might as well be running |
The
newspaper published a story Thursday telling us that only three of the 16
candidates have bothered to file the financial disclosure reports that are
required by law of all campaigns for federal office.
OR,
AT LEAST they’re required of any candidate who has either raised or spent more
than $5,000 as part of their campaign.
The
point of these reports is to give us a clue as to where this person gets their
money from. What is their income? Do they have spouses who have significant financial
wealth?
Have
they invested their money in something that provides a significant financial dividend
that they can live off of, and would be indebted to politically – if elected to
office?
If
this is a person who truly is working for a living, it comes out in these
reports.
AND
AS FOR those individuals who don’t want to have to give up such information, I’d
argue we’re better off having them weeded out of the political process. I literally
recall when broadcaster Howard Stern talked of running for office, it was this
requirement that ultimately got him to back off.
Because
we would have learned just how wealthy he truly was – despite his attempt to
create an image of a guy who’s down-to-earth and more-in-touch with the people
(and our crudity) than other politicians.
But
back to Illinois, where it seems that most of the candidates didn’t bother to
meet the deadline for reporting.
The
Sun-Times reported that Debbie Halvorson of Crete, Robin Kelly of Matteson and
Toi Hutchinson of Olympia Fields all filed (although Hutchinson needed an
extension to get her papers together). And it isn’t clear why Anthony Beale of
the Roseland neighborhood didn’t file.
BUT
FOR THE rest of the campaigns, it is all too clear why they didn’t bother.
We’re
talking the ultimate in fringe campaigns – those candidates who manage to get
their names on the ballot but never get included in the coverage leading up to
Election Day.
And
if, in the end, they get a full 1 percent of the vote, they consider themselves
successful. Because their point in running was usually to try to advance a pet
issue or cause that they hold dear.
Getting
their names on the ballot was about gaining a public forum.
IF
ANY OF them were to actually win on Feb. 26, their reaction likely would be
even more bewildered than that of actor Robert Redford’s “Bill McKay” character
in “The Candidate.”
And
yes, I include one-time member of Congress Mel Reynolds in that category.
He
may be the one member of the fringe who tops 1 percent – although I’d be amazed
if he got as high as 3 percent.
So
what we’re talking about is a field of candidates who are spending no money and
are gaining no traction – all because they want to rant about some cause. Which
may be their right – they did, after all, manage to gain enough signatures of
support on nominating petitions and nobody thought it worth their time to
challenge their presence on the ballot before the Illinois State Board of
Elections.
WHICH
WILL MEAN they’ll take (at most) about 12 percent of the total vote. Leaving
about 88 percent of the vote for the “real” candidates for Congress.
This
truly is going to be an election in which a candidate with 25 percent support
is going to be able to declare themselves “da Winnah” and move to Washington.
These
are just a few thoughts to keep in mind Thursday if you happen to pay much
attention to the candidate “forum” being held at Governors State University out
in University Park – where it seems they’re actually going to have the bulk of
the 16 Dems and five GOPers who are on the primary ballots.
Personally,
I live just outside (less than a full mile) the boundaries of the Illinois
Second Congressional district. But those of you who have to make a choice, keep
in mind that most the candidate field is best ignored as you try to figure out
which woman is fit for D.C.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment