How will you vote for, part 2...

[raccol]

RE: http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/is ... s.gun.html

Bill Richardson
Opposed the 1994 assault weapons ban, but voted for the crime bill that included it. Later voted to repeal the assault weapons ban. As governor, signed law allowing adults 21 and older who pass background checks and take a gun safety class to carry a concealed weapon. Has a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Says he has had a gun in the house during his adult lifetime. Has an A rating from the NRA.

[nitrogen]

Richardson is also the most seasoned, experienced politician on the Democratic side. IT's a travesty that he's out of the race; proving just how stupid the party really is.

[raccol]

Richardson is also the most seasoned, experienced politician on the Democratic side. IT's a travesty that he's out of the race; proving just how stupid the party really is.

Agreed. Just illustrates how the process is flawed. A couple of small state contents can force out a well-qualified candidate. There ought to be four super Tuesday dividing the country in quadrants with all candidates getting free, equal air time.

[frankie_the_yankee]

There ought to be four super Tuesday dividing the country in quadrants with all candidates getting free, equal air time.

So which government officials decide who is a "candidate"? How does someone get to be a candidate? What if someone thinks they are a candidate, and the government thinks they are not? And how does all that square with the 1st Amendment? Would it be against the law to advertise or campaign too soon before the primaries?

I think that at a minimum it would take a constitutional amendment to implement something like this. And I am highly skeptical of putting the government in the driver's seat. Somehow, I think that the government officials and office holders would worry more about their own interests than they would about ours.

Just like they seem to do now.

[raccol]

This is just an idea and of course all the details would have to be worked out. But something along these lines sounds reasonable to me.

So which government officials decide who is a "candidate"? How does someone get to be a candidate?

The government wouldn’t. Candidates have to petition to get on a ballot so the voters would decide who is a candidate

And how does all that square with the 1st Amendment?

Why would this even be a first amendment issue? That only applies to restricting speech, not requiring it. The govt requires broadcaster to air public service announcements and this would be along the same lines.

Would it be against the law to advertise or campaign too soon before the primaries?

I think providing airtime to all legitimate candidates for the month prior to the primary would be sufficient. No restrictions against airing more if the candidate wants to pay for it (otherwise it would be a First Amendment issue) but all legitimate candidates would be given the same minimal time.

I think that at a minimum it would take a constitutional amendment to implement something like this.

It could be passed as law and as long as it’s equal and not restrictive, shouldn’t be a need for an amendment.

And I am highly skeptical of putting the government in the driver's seat. Somehow, I think that the government officials and office holders would worry more about their own interests than they would about ours.

Most everyone would agree but the media is just as bad by them deciding who get what type of coverage and how much.

Point is lots of good candidates really never get noticed because of the media or lack of involvement with special interests.

[raccol]

BTW, the super Tuesday would be one month apart and the quadrant/region/group (whatever it ends up being) order would rotate every election cycle.

[frankie_the_yankee]

So which government officials decide who is a "candidate"? How does someone get to be a candidate?

The government wouldn’t. Candidates have to petition to get on a ballot so the voters would decide who is a candidate

The government would be handing out the free air time. They would have to have the authority to order the various media to provide it to the candidates. In doing so, they would be telling them to provide ait time to some candidates and not others. The government would have to set criteria that candidates would have to meet to qualify for air time.

Does someone like Ralph Nader or Ron Paul, with single digit or less support, get the same amount of airtime as Obama or McCain who might be polling in the 20-30% range? Who makes those decisions?

Right now, those decisions are made by individuals as they send contributions to this candidate or that one.

I trust that kind of a system more than I trust government officials to not rig the system to their perpetual advantage.

[raccol]

The government would be handing out the free air time. They would have to have the authority to order the various media to provide it to the candidates. In doing so, they would be telling them to provide ait time to some candidates and not others.

This would only apply to the network outlets since they' use the "public" airwaves. If a candidate is on the ballot, they get airtime and each gets the same amount. There would have to be a rotating schedule of who gets which time slots but I believe it could be done equitably without much difficulty. I'm sure the govt would try to make it difficult but it doesn't need to be.

The government would have to set criteria that candidates would have to meet to qualify for air time.

True, but for some candidates that means they would still get more airtime than they do with the current system.

Does someone like Ralph Nader or Ron Paul, with single digit or less support, get the same amount of airtime as Obama or McCain who might be polling in the 20-30% range? Who makes those decisions?

If they made the cut to get on the ballot, they get equal time. Who knows, maybe some of the lesser candidates would have more support with greater exposure.

[aardwolf]

Why would this even be a first amendment issue? That only applies to restricting speech, not requiring it. The govt requires broadcaster to air public service announcements and this would be along the same lines.

Can they put them on at 4am with all the other infomercials?

[raccol]

Can they put them on at 4am with all the other infomercials?

I was thinking more along the lines of 20 second ads, 6-9pm on a rotating basis so all ads get fairly equal exposure.