Hard To Argue With That

8 Comments

by: Colorado Pols

A joint press release from Sens. Mark Udall of Colorado (D) and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma (R):

Senators Mark Udall and Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) today will introduce a bill that would prohibit the use of Presidential Election Campaign Funds (PECF) for party conventions in the elections occurring after December 31, 2012. Additionally, it would allow funds dispersed before that time to be returned to the U.S. Treasury for the purpose of deficit reduction.

“Throughout my time in Congress, I have worked to maintain the integrity and fairness of the presidential nomination process,” Udall said. “Over the past several decades, political party nominating conventions have become elaborate celebrations devoted to partisanship. The American taxpayer should not be responsible for footing the bill for these partisan events. I chose to cosponsor this bill because it is a common sense, bipartisan proposal that will save taxpayers millions of dollars at a time when we need to exhibit more fiscal discipline.”

…Despite our $15.6 trillion national debt, political parties received a $36.6 million check ($18.3 million per party) from taxpayers to pay for the costs of political conventions occurring this summer. The funds that are used to cover these conventions come from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund (PECF). According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), “Federal law places relatively few restrictions on how PECF convention funds are spent, as long as purchases are lawful and are used to ‘defray expenses incurred with respect to a presidential nominating convention.'” Besides funding the event itself, the money is used to pay for entertainment, catering, transportation, hotel costs, “production of candidate biographical films,” and a variety of other expenses. These events will be weeklong parties paid for by taxpayers, much like the highly maligned GSA conference in Las Vegas.

It’s fine with us, Denver just had a convention and the one before that was 100 prior. It’s safe to bet that we won’t be getting another one anytime soon. It’s also pretty hard to argue with this as an example of a place to show some fiscal discipline–at some point, a convention that actually involved some drama would probably change that. For now, political conventions really are a taxpayer-subsidized party, even if private funds pay many of the bills.

This does not mean we’re ungrateful for 2008, however. Our local economy still thanks you all.

8 thoughts on “Hard To Argue With That”

ArapaGOP says:

June 6, 2012 at 1:02 am

Even if this is all about 2014.

Log in to Reply
1. Phoenix Rising says:
  
  June 6, 2012 at 1:25 am
  
  I’m guessing it’s not about 2014, but rather about what’s right.
  
  Log in to Reply
allyncooper says:

June 6, 2012 at 1:33 am

Agreed conventions are devoted to partisanship, duh… What an astute observation Mark and Tom.

That being said, $36.6 million breaks out to $ 9.15 million per year. We are spending $2 billion a week on our foreign wars.

With Citizens we can just have corporations pay for everything now. That will enable them to get even bigger tax breaks so the deficit increases.

Log in to Reply
Tom says:

June 6, 2012 at 2:05 am

With the elimination of taxpayer funds, that means that the conventions will be 100% corporate sponsored. Scoring points with political bigwigs by paying for a convention seems like a particularly sleazy way to influence policy.

On the other hand, taxpayers aren’t really getting any credit for making these things go anyway. Corporate sponsors still get to exert money influence by plastering their names on every banner and tote bag in the place, just subsidized by public funds.

If there’s ever any movement on campaign finance reform toward public financing of elections, they’ll definitely have to revisit this.

Log in to Reply
EmeraldKnight76 says:

June 6, 2012 at 3:04 am

Perhaps it’s time we should switch. We can have publicly funded presidential elections and privately funded conventions. Otherwise, if we do away with publicly funded conventions what do the citizens have left? With Citzens United we have no more influence left in elections (except the most local ones if you’re really lucky).

The amount of money they’re talking about is next to nothing. It won’t make a damn bit of difference when it comes to the debt or deficit. Isn’t that the line Repubs use about tax breaks?

Log in to Reply
Aaron says:

June 6, 2012 at 9:00 am

agree with Tom Coburn, I think he’s right.

In this period of slowly-improving economic recession, it seems incredibly distasteful for taxpayers to be footing the bill for political elites to party.

These days, most nominating conventions seem to be meaningless pomp and circumstance PR events.

Yes. 36 million every 4 years is sofa change to the national budget, but much like Udall’s SOTU mixed seating plan, it’s a nice guesture.

Log in to Reply
Aaron says:

June 6, 2012 at 9:00 am

agree with Tom Coburn, I think he’s right.

In this period of slowly-improving economic recession, it seems incredibly distasteful for taxpayers to be footing the bill for political elites to party.

These days, most nominating conventions seem to be meaningless pomp and circumstance PR events.

Yes. 36 million every 4 years is sofa change to the national budget, but much like Udall’s SOTU mixed seating plan, it’s a nice guesture.

Log in to Reply
1. Aaron says:
  
  June 6, 2012 at 9:02 am
  
  Apologies for the double post.
  
  Log in to Reply