The best and brightest: They err here, on the issue of special-interest money.
Whether I would consider U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz among the best and brightest, I am not certain, but sufficient to say I like him.
And, sufficient to say he errs. My humble opinion, of course, but I don't believe it right to take money from those who hope for political favor in exchange for political contributions.
Chaffetz differs. He all but calls it the American way, if indeed that is not exactly what he is saying. "I believe in the United States of America, you should be able to donate what you want to who you want as long as there is full disclosure," he is quoted as saying in today's Salt Lake Tribune.
I beg to differ. Full disclosure it not enough. A wrong is not a right simply because it becomes transparent.
Chaffetz is under attack in the Tribune's lead story. "Chaffetz's top donors: Unions," says the headline. The article says unions are the single largest source of campaign contributions for Chaffetz.
And, we are not talking just any unions, we are talking unions having to negotiate new contracts with the U.S. Postal Service in the next few years. Clearly, they are currying his favor, for, according to the Tribune, Chaffetz is the top Republican on the House subcommittee overseeing the Postal Service.
"This is why I'm sure people are trying to be friendly," the article quotes Chaffetz as saying.
Oh, did ever the article catch my attention. I am campaigning on this very issue. I do not feel comfortable taking money from those whose issues I would be coming before the legislature. I am not going to take any contributions, other than spending from my own pocket. "This time, in this election," I tell voters, "you have a choice."
I'm hoping the chance of electing someone who is not accepting such money will mean something to voters.
-- John Jackson, candidate, Utah House District 41
No comments:
Post a Comment