Posted by The Alabama Policy Institute is trying to build popular support for banning PAC-to-PAC transfers with a new video that illustrates the issue.
Most readers probably understand the issue, but for those you know who don’t, this explains it pretty well.
|
||||
12 comments to Video Explains PAC-to-PAC Issue |
ChangeI wish my friend Hinton Mitchem godspeed and good luck after his retirement from public service. Hinton, on Monday, announced what many had suspected — he will not seek re-election. I remember meeting Hinton for the first time while I was a student at Auburn University. He served the people of his [...] Ten Minutes in the House, Senate Moves On Here is a quick preview of the upcoming week in Montgomery. This week will be a standard legislative schedule for the House. We will be in session on Tuesday and Thursday with committee meetings scheduled for Wednesday. Back in the Day... Union Avenue in Ozark in the 1920s |
The Alabama Line is being updated and will return perhaps as soon as the first week of February. The Alabama Line and its contents are the creation of Doc’s Political Parlor, reflect consensus from insiders and well-connected folks on both sides of the aisle, and will be updated as conditions change. These odds are meant to inform, entertain, and provoke, not to serve as actual means for losing money. Permission granted to use this material if PoliticalParlor.net is cited as the source. |
||
|
Copyright © 2010 Doc's Political Parlor - All Rights Reserved |
||||
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
The chances for the ban are what I wonder? There has been at least what….two or three cycles already where the legislation just cannot make it through the legislature. I dare say it may be the ruling party’s fault perhaps…
Wow, BrokeSnake, we all stand in complete and utter awe at your insightful and trailblazing commentary.
I assume you’ll be following this up by painting a nude that will sell for 6 figures, sailing your catamaran across the pond, reading two chapters of “Ulysses”, and composing the fifth act to your Shakespearian play about the timeless perils of PAC-to-PAC abuse.
Hey, I feel like we can all relax. I mean, the Alabama Policy Institute is on it, and Gary Palmer made Doc’s list of the most influential Alabamians. So we should be good.
I know I’m resting easier while I’m chewing my fresh long-cut Copenhagen and polishing my M-4 carbine.
that Gunney sure has a way with words…lol
If those things could be true, I would dig it, but alas, I take the dig instead. Your eloquence in stirring those images in my head, for at least a few moments though, are appreciated. Rest easy you say, and I will, but with long-cut Skoal Straight instead. Did they at least give you the ACOG for your M-4 instead of the Aimpoint I had to walk around with? Again, thank you, if for nothing else, I did gain a few minutes of picturing myself on a catamaran painting a nude while listening to “Ulysses” on tape and dictating the closing act of a play concerning at least a decade’s worth of peril of PAC to PAC abuse.
Now, having said all of that, do you not agree that the action of PAC to PAC transfers opens up a Pandora’s cubicle of unethical practices? I mean, we are on this government transparency bandwagon, and I for one would like to know who puts what money in someone’s pocket.
Cares? I’ll tell you roughly 2million Alabamians who don’t – The Voters.
The Aimpoint’s for direct action and surgical shooting, which is where the men are, so call my secretary and I’ll schedule a time to tell you all about it.
As for transparency and administrative controls on the behavior of elected officials, well, I’m simply not naïve enough to believe that banning PAC-to-PAC transfers will end up being lauded by historians as the Holy Grail of ethical reform in Alabama.
Nor do I believe that the Governor’s package, the one he can’t explain, will end up making a hill of beans either. But it has done a serviceable job of masking his own questionable behavior…other than the Sam’s gift-able items shenanigan. Of which I’m still not certain if he got my I-Pod Nano order…it’ll hold plenty of Dead shows.
I know my opinion runs counter to the emotional river of support that blows downstream like the Ocoee for the PAC-to-PAC ban on this blog, but I really don’t care…I can swim like a salmon anyways. The funny thing is, there’s really only one legislator I know of who’s concerned with the issue; the rest just want to campaign on it. I, along with said legislators, wonder what the hell they’ll campaign on when it’s gone.
So if you’ve traded in your M-4 for the PAC-to-PAC ban and Operation Iraqi Freedom for the 2010 Alabama elections, then I wish you well in the upcoming battle.
And I also appreciate your good humor and your service.
So Errr…
Thank you Gunney and right back at ya!
I suppose my line of thinking is I feel that Alabama could use ethics reform on a large front and if a ban on PAC to PAC transfers is kicking down the door to it, then I support it.
Which is the point many reformers fail to grasp. Until the voters care, the incumbents don’t have to.
Most people are sufficiently happy to express the will every few years at the polls. This is one of the main reasons for my firm (click on my name if you want to know more, thanks).
Like Gunney said, many legislators ran on ethics reform as an issue they supported but failed to act on that notion in the Session. That’s no good and they get another Session at least before most people will take the opportunity to act on it if they disapproved. To me, there has to be more accountability and I am tracking to crack the code of making it happen.
The HOUSE has passed this bill 8 or 9 times. Please NOTE the exception and do not continually use the “legislature” as your frame of reference. The HOUSE has done it’s job. It’s the SENATE that needs to its.
The House passes a lot of bills with a “wink & nod” to the Senate and they are never seen again.
You need the rule book form Montgomery on how to look good and still do nothing.
Alright gentlmen… As a “strategic researcher” in a few more recent elections, I can fully attest to the power behind P2PX. I’ve seen first hand how a certain union official can funnel untold quantities into the coffers of like minded individuals (lap dogs) unbeknownst to the very persons donating to that union. Who am I kidding we all know who I’m talking about. Stat’s don’t lie, I’ve been working on a regression analysis of P2PX and found that hubby at best uses the third degree and occasionally goes further. Can’t wait till I get this baby closer to 99%.
Wanna see P2PX stop… Pass local legislation that supports liability insurance for teachers. Take that chip and throw it in with the limitation of union officials political use of participants funds (full disclosure)and you’ll see the flow of money slow to a trickle.
Maybe if you do both those things you’ll see the opponents to P2P lose their figurehead.