Welfare Queens...

[Jagos]

The seven Democrats who ran (or are still running) for President, not one of whom will be on the ballot this November. As of April 1, here’s how much of your tax money each has received to fund their failed campaigns:

Wesley K. Clark $7,552,570.68
John R. Edwards $6,108,375.37
Joseph Lieberman $4,233,709.85
Richard A. Gephardt $4,104,319.82
Dennis Kucinich $3,075,300.72
Lyndon H. LaRouche $1,276,465.03
Al Sharpton $179,708.99

President George W. Bush and Senator John F. Kerry. They declined political welfare in the primary so they could raise and spend campaign funds without any limits. However, both are happy to let the taxpayers pick up the tab for their fall campaigns. President Bush and Senator Kerry will EACH receive $72,640,000, courtesy of you and me. That’s another $145,280,000 of government waste that needs to be eliminated.

------------------------------------------

I got this from the Gary Nolan website for the Libertarian party. Anyone know where to find proof of these numbers?

Also, right now it's a fight for the presidency between Aaron Russo and Gary Nolan. Who are you voting for? If Nolan doesn't like file sharing, I'm going to grudgingly go with Russo (he's got a lot of friends in Hollywood, who's really anti- filesharing.)

[The Tortured one]

Interesting data, It's good to know that money that would otherwise go to my children's college fund is now being used by candidates (who aren't even running anymore) to badmouth the opposition so they can win more votes. I love the rampant careerism that's taken a chokehold on american politics...

I like Russo's policies better, but I think Nolan has more charm, more of a moderate charisma that attracts voters. Like a friend pointed out, he said "Russo reminded me of the stereotypical angry third party candidate, were as Nolan seemed to me to be more like a social liberal republican.

Plus I've met Nolan in person, he's a real nice guy.

[Luna Santin]

Total: $171,810,450.46.

So we, as a nation, are whining about 171.8 million dollars? Right. Divide by 50 and you've reached the absolutely stunning figure of nearly 3.44 million dollars per state! Seriously, I think there are better things to complain about in the federal budget.

[DarthZeth]

yeah, like the fact that we, as a generation, are being fleeced by our elders by social security.

do the math. by the time i'm going to retire, there will be too many old foggies like me to keep the same benefits coming. But i'll have paid into SS all my life!

but yeah, we have a 5 trillion dollar budget. thats not much in the Grand Scheme.

i mean, on the surface, why should the race be determined by who ahs the most money? isn't funding a viable candidate that isn't as good at fund raisng a somewhat goo didea?

[The Tortured one]

luna, its another drop in the ocean that shouldn't be there. Social security, Welfare, all of these things are my money thats being wasted for programs I either wont use or won't be able to use. by the time the baby boomers reach retirement, there will be 2 elderly provided for by one taxpayer. Now THATs alot of money.

it may not seem like much, but I personally wouldn't give a dime to any candidate, be he a democrat or republican. so when i see these figures, it's disheartening. I'm sure there are plenty of other good uses those money could be used for.

[DarthZeth]

when i filled out my tax return this year, im pretty sure they had a "would you like $2 to go to politcal candidates?" box that you can check.

So, is all that money thats been spent compulsory or optional? becasue thats only abotu $.50 per US citizen. so if only a fourth check the box, that'd be enough to cover it. right?

[Xeno14]

This policy has been going on for a long time. Money would be going to the libertain's if they got something like 5% of the vote

[DarthZeth]

i thought we were talking about fund matching. so, like, Clark raised $7,552,570.68 so he got $7,552,570.68 from the government.

altho you might be right. you coudl get funds if you get 5% of teh vote.

i do know that 5% of the vote gets you on the ballot next year automatically, with out having to collect signatures and petitions.

[Xeno14]

not quite sure the exact process needed to be put on a ballot. I'm still unsure on the exact percent of the vote you need for government funding of a party or person, i probably should ask people in my office

[DarthZeth]

Contributions from individuals where the aggregate amount contributed by the individual is $250 or less are eligible to be matched on a dollar for dollar basis from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. This Fund includes proceeds from the voluntary check-off of $3 per person from income tax returns of eligible taxpayers. Candidates may submit any contribution from an individual (including those where the contribution amount is more than $250) in order to receive matching funds for the first $250 of the contribution. Some contributions included in these files, therefore, will also be included as detailed entries in the regular financial disclosure reports submitted by the campaigns.

This says that it INCLUDES proceeds from the tax refund check off. this doesn’t say its ALL voluntary. (although, in reality, you’re just choosing which direction your money goes, not whether or not to spend it. When you check that box, you’re not choosing to give another $3. if you DIDNT check the box, they'd take your money anyway and use it for something else)

source: http://www.fec.gov/finance/2004matching/matching.html

I’m sifting thru http://www.ballot-access.org/ at the moment. it seems ballot access is determined by state law. so, like, George Bush could get on all the ballots except for Georgia (or something), if he didn’t meet Georgia requirements.

Nothing I’ve come across links votes or signatures to funds received from the government tho. The closest to that is form my first link, where it says “(Candidates become eligible when they receive at least $5,000 in matchable contributions from individuals in each of twenty states.)”