As we continue our story, I look at Representative Ken Paxton’s financial report to the ethics commission of the state of Texas. During the period of 7/1/2011 to 12/31/2011, Rep. Paxton raised $190,508.40; with expenditures of $43,612.58; leaving a balance in his campaign of $853,876.47 total dollars from his years of campaigning. Of that $190,508 that was raised, $42,424 came from political action committees, or approximately 25 percent. Let me say that I have been a contributor to Rep. Paxton, and consider him to be a
friend. I honestly believe that he has the best interest in mind for the citizens that he represents. But, why do political candidates who are so conservative accept contributions from political action committees at all? Given the numbers that I just mentioned, it’s quite evident that Rep. Paxton has broad financial support from his district.
Here we are going into a general election for the Presidency of the United States, and in the primary for the Republican Party nomination, political action committees have already spent over $100 million. Analysts are
projecting that President Obama will raise one billion dollars, and Governor Romney likewise. I haven’t been able to determine what the percentage of political action committees contributions versus citizens will be to raise that billion dollars. One might say that the office of the presidency is being bought by corporate America. As individuals climb the political ladder, their power grows, and you ask yourself: how much of that quest is for doing the right thing; how much for power and to enrich themselves financially? I know I got off the subject of Rep. Paxton’s campaign contributions, but I know in my heart that he wants to do the right thing. I hope my friend, Rep. Paxton, chooses one day to stop taking contributions from these committees. With the ruling of the Supreme Court that contributions by corporations can be unlimited……. WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?!
As constitutional amendments go, I’ve already stated in previous articles that 1)There must be a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget, that you can’t spend more than you take in; 2) Term limits; and now, 3) No
contributions by corporations to candidates running for public office.
I had also mentioned in a previous article that I wondered what would happen to all the money left in their campaign account once they are no longer seeking political office. The good news is that no candidate is legally allowed to take it for personal use. There are only six things they can do with the money, and the two I like best are that you can give it to a charity or to another individual’s political campaign. So for all of you candidates who have money left in your campaign accounts, I have a great charity in mind, one for abused and neglected children. I’ll be awaiting those emails where I can pick up the checks.
By now everyone knows that Rep. Paxton is running for the senate seat being vacated by Senator Shapiro. For the record, he has my vote.
If you missed part one of Politicians and Money, please click here.
Quote of the day:
Our lives are not determined by what happens to us but by how we react to what happens, not by what life brings to us, but by the attitude we bring to life. A positive attitude causes a chain reaction of positive thoughts, events, and outcomes. It is a catalyst, a spark that creates extraordinary results.
David Dorman is a TSB editorial columnist. He served as Mayor of Melissa until 2009, beginning public service there in 1999 after being elected to the city council. Dorman worked many years in the business world prior to public service. He contributes to numerous charitable entities and continues continues to invest in children by offering his time and finances to further the goals of Collin County Children’s Advocacy Center, Children’s Medical Center of Dallas. He currently serves on the board of Court Appointed Special Advocates of Collin County.