(The 'value' is about $100 million per campaign...but that's getting ahead of myself)
Here are some recent news stories that relate to my recent questioning of elections.
The first two relate to the funding of the candidates (While we may vote for the presented candidates, who decides which candidates are presented? Those with Money of course!)
Death Knell May Be Near for Public Election Funds (01-23-07)
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRIC
The public financing system has failed to keep pace with the torrents of money flowing toward the presidential elections.
Democrats Chasing Big Money (02-15-07)
by Chris Cillizza
Every serious candidate is spending hours each day courting the whales who can write big check.
This next piece explores the possibility of region politics superseding national politics (as in secession from), with my home state of California at the center.
California Split (02-10-07)
by GAR ALPEROVITZ
"Somthing interesting is happening in California. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger seems to have grasped the essential truth that no nation — not even the United States — can be managed successfully from the center once it reaches a certain scale..."
And lastly, what are the prospects of a participatory politics (enabled by blogging)? It is hard
to tell, but Edwards is paving the way.
Edwards Learns Campaign Blogs Can Cut 2 Ways (02-08-07)
By JOHN M. BRODER
tag line: Candidates could face problems as they try to integrate online political discourse into traditional campaigning.
So while the price tag of running a successful campaign is very steep ($100 mil.),
is it really worth it?