Radiofree West Hartford - CONGRATULATIONS, CONNECTICUT! by Tim Siggia

CONGRATULATIONS, CONNECTICUT!

By Tim Siggia

December 03, 2005

Congratulations to our Connecticut state legislature, which now has taken us one step further to realizing its dream of making us truly the People's Republic of Connecticut. By a sweeping vote, they have approved a bill which, when enacted, will impose public financing of state elections. Our "Republican" governor, of course, eagerly awaits her opportunity to sign this bill into law.

Connecticut's news media are, of course, ecstatic over this, gleefully proclaiming that strict limits are now in place over how much money can be contributed by lobbyists and special interests. In their euphoria over the latest episode in Connecticut's headlong plunge to socialism, they naturally ignore what all RFWH readers should know, if they all in fact don't know: that the measure is a blatantly unconstitutional attack on free speech. They make it sound as if it were another victory of us-against-them, and "we" are winning. But are we, really? Let's take a closer look.

First of all, lobbyists and special interests are not separate entities. The one group works for the other. It is how they make their living. Lobbyists are employed by special interest groups. And anyone who thinks "special interests" consist only of entities like "Big Oil" or "Big Tobacco" had better think again. More specifically, a little self-examination might be in order.

For instance:

If you are age 50 or older, and belong to AARP or some similar senior organization, guess what: You're represented by a special interest group! Do you belong to a union at work? Ditto! "Big Labor" is speaking for you at the State Capitol. Did you serve in the military? You're a veteran, and as such belong to yet another cadre of special interests. And all of these and more have paid lobbyists promoting their various causes both in Hartford and in Washington. You know what else? There is nothing wrong with this! It's called democracy in action. It's similar to what ordinary citizens do when they elect representatives to speak for them, rather than take their various cases to the halls of government themselves. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it -- except, of course, in the minds of liberals, too many of whom, especially in the Northeast, inhabit the Republican Party, but the vast majority of whom are found, ironically enough, in the ranks of the Democratic Party. (Democrats voting against democracy. Get it?)

In a previous column, I urged readers to vote against any referendum item calling for public financing of political campaigns. Somebody in the liberal camp (which encompasses virtually the entire state) must have read that column, and decided not to risk losing this proposal by putting it to the voters. They put it instead to liberal legislators, and we ordinary citizens never even got a chance to make our voices heard. We will, however, get that chance next November, when most of the legislators who voted for public financing will be seeking reelection. Let us each do a search on our own state reps and state senators to find out how they voted.

One final thought: It is said that the money to pay for this public financing will come from unclaimed assets, which, at first hearing, sounds as if it will cost the taxpayers nothing. Oh really? The well of unclaimed assets is not infinite. Sooner or later (and most likely sooner), it is bound to run dry. Where will the money come from then? Ask your state senator or state rep that one, and see how he dances around it! Inevitably, it simply means this: that we will all end up kicking in to finance the campaign of a candidate we are hoping to see defeated -- not because we want to, but simply because we have no choice.