“The need for collecting large campaign funds would vanish [go away] if Congress provided an appropriation [federal money] for the proper . . . expenses of each of the great national parties, an appropriation ample [large] enough to meet the necessity [the needs of the political parties]. . . . Then [the parties should agree that] no party receiving campaign funds from the [federal] Treasury should accept more than a fixed amount from any individual . . . and [detailed information about the money taken in and spent] could without difficulty be provided.”
—President Theodore Roosevelt, Annual Message to Congress, December 3, 1907
Would you support President Roosevelt’s proposal?
Explain.
I don't get what does that say .. I don't see anything about it talking about a proposal ...
In this situation, a proposal is a suggestion that the speaker would like to see followed.
Here, President Roosevelt is proposing that Congress give money to the political parties. This money would be used to help elect senators, representatives, and the president. If Congress gave them money, then the parties couldn't take more than a certain amount from any individuals.
I think his proposal is a great idea! Our political campaigns have grown so expensive that it's obscene. Big business and very rich people are buying our elections.
What do you think?
President Theodore Roosevelt is proposing a solution to the issue of collecting large campaign funds in this statement. He suggests that if Congress provides federal money to cover the necessary expenses of each national party, the need for collecting large campaign funds would disappear. To implement this, President Roosevelt suggests that there should be a sufficient appropriation from the federal treasury for the political parties. He also recommends that parties agree not to accept more than a fixed amount of campaign funds from any individual. Additionally, he emphasizes the importance of transparency by mentioning detailed information about the money received and spent, which should be easily accessible.
Whether or not one would support President Roosevelt's proposal is subjective and depends on individual perspectives. Some arguments in favor of the proposal could be:
1. Reducing dependence on private campaign funding: This proposal aims to decrease the reliance on private donations, thereby reducing the influence of wealthy individuals or special interest groups in political campaigns.
2. Ensuring fairness and equal opportunities: By providing a fixed amount of federal money to each political party, it could create a more level playing field. Parties would have the necessary resources to run competitive campaigns, regardless of their financial strength.
3. Enhancing transparency: The requirement for detailed reporting of campaign funds received and spent would promote transparency, allowing citizens to easily monitor the flow of money in politics.
However, there are also potential arguments against the proposal:
1. Misallocation of taxpayer money: Critics might argue that using federal money for political campaigns is a misappropriation of taxpayer funds, as these resources could be utilized for other pressing needs.
2. Limiting freedom of support: Opponents may claim that restricting the amount individuals can donate to political campaigns infringes on their freedom of expression. They may argue that individuals should have the right to support candidates or parties of their choice by contributing as much as they desire.
3. Continuing influence of special interest groups: Despite the proposed measures, some may argue that special interest groups could still find ways to influence political campaigns and agendas, bypassing the restrictions and transparency measures put in place.
Ultimately, whether or not to support President Roosevelt's proposal depends on one's values, priorities, and opinions about campaign finance and the role of money in politics.