Looking For A Bipartisan Campaign Issue?
Attention Democrats: If you want to campaign on something that appeals to American voters across the political spectrum, how about this?
From a MoveOn poll of 9600 likely voters in 18 battleground states and districts:
1) How important is it … that a candidate for Congress … commits to reduce the influence corporations have over elections?
Very or Somewhat Important: Democrats 90 (70+20)%, Independents 75 (53+22)%, Republicans 72 (44+28)%, Overall 79 (56+23)%.
2) How important is it … that a candidate for Congress … commits to reduce the influence lobbyists have over the way laws are written?
Very or Somewhat Important: Democrats 91 (73+18)%, Independents 89 (68+21)%, Republicans 87 (63+24)%, Overall 89 (68+21)%.
3) Are you more likely … or less likely … to support a candidate for Congress … if that candidate commits to limit the influence that large corporations have over how the government runs?
More Likely/Less Likely: Democrats 75/8%, Independents 59/10%, Republicans 53/14%, Overall 62/11%
4) Which of these 2 statements do you agree with more? One: Corporate lobbyists have too much influence over members of Congress. Two: Members of Congress are influenced more by voters than by corporate lobbyists.
Lobbyists/Voters: Democrats 85/13%, Independents 82/14%, Republicans 81/16%, Overall 83/14%
There are ten more questions at the link, and the responses continue a general theme of distaste for this institutionalized corruption, and an awareness that both parties have enabled it. Overwhelming majorities of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans believe that large corporations and their lobbyists have more control over our government than they do, and want to see candidates who will give us our government back.
It’s a slam-dunk no-brainer of an issue, opposed only by the moneyed interests who benefit from the status quo. And therein lies the catch-22: We can’t pass real campaign finance reform because our politicians are in thrall to lobbyists and big-money campaign donors… because we can’t pass real campaign finance reform.
It sure would be a great way for a progressive challenger to get a leg up and turn an incumbent’s cash advantage against them, though. I’m just saying.