Simple Change Needed in Presidential Elections: Cut Off Money

In Regard to The Recent Presidential Election....

NOTHING IS GONNA CHANGE UNTIL WE CHANGE IT!

Over 2-billion dollars was spent collectively for a job that pays $400,000 a year. Does that make good fiscal sense?

The popular vote was split almost evenly for the current President and for Mitt Romney. the Republican Challenger.... why?

THERE REALLY ISN'T MUCH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM!

Yes, I know that their policies may be different in certain areas, but ...

THERE REALLY ISN'T MUCH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM!

Why do I say that?

Because, with all the mudslinging, back biting and negative ad campaigning,
WHO HEARS THE MESSAGE? All I hear is Blah-Blah-Blah.

And in this day and age of the 24 hour news cycle, the condensed-edited news-bite and viciously over adiquate political analysts, we keep getting hit over the head, again and again and again with all the negative vibes, man!

I know people tell me, 'it's up to you to do your research to pick the dude that you think should run the country, yadda, yadda, yadda.' But there's a problem with that....

There's so many people who are experts in getting their internet sites and articles to the tip top of the google-bing-yahoo search world. They know the best to to 'freely' get their candidates message, information or negative propoganda to the top of the internet world. So what do we do to stop it and turn this thing around?

Big Wally may have the answer....

1) Outlaw Super Pac political money being spent on ANY campaign. A Pro-Romney Super Pac,  Restore Our Future launched a $1.8 million ad campaign in Minnesota and New Mexico alone. That's just one Super Pac spending in those two states!

Super PACs may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, associations and individuals, then spend unlimited sums to overtly advocate for or against political candidates. Super PACs must, however, report their donors to the Federal Election Commission on a monthly or quarterly basis -- the Super PAC's choice -- as a traditional PAC would. Unlike traditional PACs, Super PACs are prohibited from donating money directly to political candidates.

DOES THIS SEEM FAIR? I don't think so. Restore Our Future spent a total of , $142,655,220, during this election, alone. Obama had his Super PAC Money as well!

2) Mandate that the candidates can only spend, in any election, 10 times what their annual salary would be. For the Presidential elections, that with be a total of 40-million dollars. AND, only 25% of that ad money can be spent 'Negatively' campaigning against your opponent. What that would do is give a limited pool of money that would most certainly mostly go toward telling voters what you WOULD DO, not what your opponent WOULD DO TO SCREW IT ALL UP.

3) A bi-partisan committee will be set up to monitor the amount of negative ads. That committee will be set up by the majority and minority leaders of the house of both parties and consist of 8 total members. For local elections that state may mandate how that will be taken care of.

THAT'S IT!

Less money means less chances of Negative BS. It will also force candidates to do what they used to do... GET ON THE NEWS!  That's where we used to get our info, back in the day. The news covering candidates saying what they will do, instead of political ads saying what their opponents won't do, or lied about.

4) Tell me what you're gonna do! It seems a novel idea. I wanna know why I should vote for you, so hit me up with your platform. The other guy will hit me up with his, and I, A Registered Voter, will make up my mind, PERIOD!

I'm just a regular guy, but it seems to me that if you stop the never ending stream of political money pouring in from every which way, then you'll stop the electionering BS!

I'd rather make up my mind for whom I wanna vote for,  without being influenced by: DowProctorandGambleIBMPepsicoEnergyfromshaleNationalCannabisIndustryAss.

END OF STORY!