George Will downplayed the impact of corporations buying our elections by comparing the amount of money they're spending on political ads to what they spend advertising their products. I have to say I agree with Otherday at Daily Kos who after reading Will's column in the Washington Post where he said the same thing, Will just made the case for public funding of our elections.
Maybe he ate some sour stewed prunes, but George Will was off his game, again. His latest essay was meant to be the usual, over-the-top Obama-bashing exercise that swirved off course into making wonderful arguments why we should have publicly financed elections. George Will's argument for public campaign financing.
For example, Mr. Will tells us how inexpensive it would be to pay for such a national, public election program. To pay for a two-year cycle for all elections is about $4.2 billion, and he shows us how doable that is:
That is about what Americans spend in one year on yogurt but less than they spend on candy in two Halloween seasons.
George Will is exactly right: we can easily afford that!
Here's Will's hackery on This Week pretending that voters don't care about the issue, when actually they do. It's just the beltway Villagers who are desperately trying to convince everyone this doesn't matter:
GEORGE WILL: Two points about money. First of all, in this gusher of money we may spend this year in the two year cycle $4.2 billion, something like that. That's less than half of what Proctor & Gamble is going to spend advertising its products in one year. It is approximately what Americans will spend on yogurt this year. This is a rich country and the fact that we spend so little trying to influence the selection of those who will make and administer the laws is the amazing thing. Second, surely we're learning as we repeatedly do every two years the declining marginal utility of the last political dollar. There's just so much you can do in throwing stuff on television.
AMANPOUR: Well, explain that. Do these ads work? First of all, the issue of transparency is a big issue and a legitimate issue transparency.
WILL: It is not a big issue for the voters of this country that when losing political movements such as the Democratic Party at this moment want to talk about process. No one cares about process.
George, I tell you what, if it doesn't matter and it's just fine to allow corporations to buy our politicians, lets make them all walk around like NASCAR drivers with all of their sponsors' logos on their jackets so we know who bought them.