Sunday, September 9, 2012

Board member's argument against campaign contribution limits

At the recent Hercules Democratic Club education forum, I asked board member Madeline Kronenberg about her position on campaign contribution limits.  I did so because of the large sums of money paid to board members by those entities with a financial interest in our district, including developers, contractors, etc.

The following article cites the greater than $100,000.00 paid to one board member during his campaign. Mrs. Kronenberg pocketed close to $70,000.00!

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/gyrobase/shiny-buildings-shady-dealings/Content?oid=2812513&showFullText=true

Her response was that she is against contribution limits.  She cited the example that if a candidate receives an endorsement from the teachers' union, that this is worth much more money than the dollar amount received from a developer by another candidate.  I get her point.  It would not be a level playing field if the United Teachers of Richmond pays to have a flyer mailed to all district cities for a candidate while the other candidate can barely afford the cost of printing flyers at Kinkos.

The only "special interest group" I want supporting our candidates are the parents.  Even the teachers' union has an agenda that is not always in the best interest of our children.  So maybe each candidate should communicate to the teachers' union that they do not seek or want their endorsement.  This election should be about parents and taxpayers and children, not about unions or developers.

2 comments:

  1. Testing new setting. Anyone should now be able to comment if they so choose.

    ReplyDelete
  2. One of the classic arguments against campaign contribution limits by politicians like Kronenberg is that if there is some way to try and evade it then the whole thing should be abandoned. The struggle to control the influence of money on elections is just that, a struggle. Sure, it's important to deal with in-kind contributions like inclusion on slate cards and independent expenditures, but let's keep a sense of proportion. The article you were talking about was about almost $200K of construction-interest cash in a school board election.

    ReplyDelete