American Politics is a Billionaire Business

American Politics is a Billionaire Business

In the 1970s we had The Six Million Dollar Man television series starring Lee Majors.  As of April 2012, President Barack Obama can claim the title of “The One Billion Dollar Man.”  My, the cost of inflation these days.  In eight short years of his political career, Obama has amassed over $1 billion in political campaign donations, a sure sign to some of his harshest critics that he is the political antichrist.

As reported by The Daily Caller, a conservative online news site, Obama’s big campaign donors are from those who share his background and vision.  “His top sources of funding are the sectors and companies that employ people like him — people with post-graduate degrees form elite universities.  The top sources are the University of California, Goldman Sachs, Microsoft Corp., Harvard University and Google, each of which provided him with $1 million or more. The University of California topped the list at $1.98 million.”

Obama’s presidency is proving that whether it’s a Democrat or Republican temporary occupant, White House fundraising is a bipartisan money machine.  Ask many Americans and they will tell you that we aren’t getting the best politics money can buy.

 

6 thoughts on “American Politics is a Billionaire Business

  1. I believe that this system of politicians making money is not all bad. It shows how strongly he/she is supported by its followers. In a way it may seem like it is all about knowing the right people but it also means that he/she has successfully persuaded people into believing he/she’s ideas. Also if politicians make money, the right people and intelligent people will take a part in politics more often since they get paid better. i believe that this is important.

  2. I was not quite aware that universities could top the chart for political campaign donations. Moreover, it is disturbing to see how the current system of campaign financing allows outside sources to make huge contributions that can strongly influence the electoral outcomes. There is no doubt that those Obama big campaign donors have superior power and influence than an average American who goes to vote.

  3. In my opinion, money is one of the barometers to measure a person’s potential and influence. So the results that President Obama could amass a billion to run campaigns means he has a power to attract people, and people placed their hope in him. By making money, politicians can show very easily how they get credit from the people. However, there is a risk for politicians and elections to become business-like rather than considering a nation’s future. In fact, presidential elections in America are now ‘a big show’ due to their over-the-top performances and excess promotions.

    Thus, the problem is whether people deserve a better life by financing a billion to Obama or not. To determine the best person who you can give enormous money to him or her is important, I think.

  4. Hi Hiroaki – It’s important to understand these supporters are corporations and institutions with business interests that don’t necessarily align with the interests/needs of the population. You should also know that many donors often give support to the rival candidate as well so that no matter who wins the race, they have leveraged influence with the winner – playing both sides against the other. Many Americans are of the opinion that our government is more interested in the facilitation of business interests (especially overseas and where natural resources are concerned) than it is in governing.

  5. I always felt the contradiction in the politics whenever I heard the news about millions and billions being donated to politicians. The politicians are striving so hard (maybe not hard enough though) to make money to use for government, when those individuals receive billions from the super rich people. However, I never thought they deserve all the criticism. It is true that they are not doing enough for how much they are being donated for, but they need those monies to keep themselves “politicians.” As long as the good is in them, and their aspirations for changing the country into a better society not disappeared, I believe they ought to receive donations. It sounds too idealistic, but since being a politician costs a lot of money, it has to be acknowledged to some extent. The one to be blamed is not the politician who receives billion-dollar-donations, but the current society in which they have to have enormous amounts of money to seek for a change.

  6. Although the whole “money race’ in US politics is the only strategic way to win, I still disagree with the whole concept. In order to receive large amounts of donations, one would have to be popular. I think this puts people with good, if not better, political ideas that lack popularity in a bad position where they can’t even compete with those who are popular. I think they should construct a political environment for EVERYONE to be able to have a chance to speak their minds and compete and then they might find a new type of candidate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s