I looked at the addresses of the first 50 people who gave to this good-for-nothing Commissioner, Dorrin Rolle. Out of the 50 (from places like Coral Gables, Pembroke Pines, Miami Lakes and Arlington, Va.) only 6 could possibly be from his district...and one of those is Dorrin Rolle himself, with a $10,000 loan. And, this is quite remarkable: out of 1,445 donors, less than 25 gave him $50. He didn’t get any $10 donations and he got 4 $25 donations. The bulk of the contributions were for $250 - $500. How many of those giving $250 to $500 are regular voters in his district? I would guess out of 1,445 about 10 to 15 tops vote in his district, probably less.
On the other hand, Millie Herrera, running against Commissioner Souto, out of 159 donations total, got 6 for $500.
If I had more time I would analyze all the campaign finance reports. But, that is for the Miami Herald to do – they have paid staff.
I have found over and over again: Commissioners are getting the bulk of their money to finance their campaigns, from outside their district — and we, the little people, are not in the mix at all.
P.S. Roosevelt Bradley supporters: This man should not have been reelected. He is part of the problem. You cannot continue to support bad candidates just because they possess one thing you like: Skin.
5 comments:
An interesting new blog I found just popped up defending Mr. Bradley. Not sure how often it's going to be updated.
i looked at the blog and couldn't quite get it....but thanks for sending the link
For almost 30 years I worked for a Florida company that relies heavily on lobbyists at the local, state and federal level of government. This company also used a PAC to gather funds for part of its lobbying effort. At one point in time one of the lobbyists was brought in to give a presentation on how important it was for the PAC to fund various politicians. I will never forget the matter of fact way he presented what he called the pyramid of influence showing how political contributions of money and other factors influence politicians.
Think of a pyramid with the top point being the top contributors of money, time and other direct or indirect efforts to get a politician elected. Across the bottom of the pyramid, the base, are the general public, those who do not vote or play a part in any way in the election process. In today’s political environment this is a majority of the public. Between these two extremes are the people and organizations that influence the voting of the elected official. The pecking order from top to bottom had much to do with influencing the election of the person and keeping that person in office.
The point the lobbyist made was that the top pyramid place holders get the attention of the elected official and that due to the various levels in the pyramid the bottom layer, the general public, get no real attention. The lobbyist focused on what it takes to get into the upper layers of the pyramid. Its not just money, although money does play a major roll; Probably as important as money is being known, in a good light, by the politician and his or her staff. Again helping the person get elected and stay in office is the most important point. A PAC endorsement, the PAC newsletter letting employees know the importance of the politician and their legislation to the employees jobs, etc. (At the local level think Unions, Police and Fire). A company or other group, Union, that can bring many votes is at the top of the pyramid.
So what influence do most of us common folk have on how our elected government officials get into office and represent us? Here is some of what I remember according to this lobbyist.
Don’t be at the bottom of the pyramid!
Not a registered voter, forget it; they know you cannot elect them or keep them in office.
You don’t live in the area they represent it’s the same thing; they know you cannot elect them or keep them in office.
Not a member of his or her political party, you’re not on the bottom layer but you rank somewhere below those that are same party members.
Be as close to the top of the pyramid as you can.
Remember it’s not just money.
Hire a lobbyist, if possible someone who has day to day contact. The more time they spend with the politician the more influence they will have.
If you are a company or any other group like unions, Condo associations, start a PAC, influence your employees or members to contribute and campaign. Allow candidates to campaign on your property.
As an individual, work on their campaign; make sure you personally meet them and their staff. Make sure you make a lasting positive impression.
I know much of this is common sense but my point is, as an ordinary person your individual influence is next to nothing. What bothered me at the time was that the lobbyist said that it may not be fair to the public but that was the way it was. This still holds true today.
If you are not at or near the top of the pyramid you or your cause does not stand a chance.
thanks for the education....the herald should print it!
What is most surprising is not that citizens have little or no say over their local government but that most people don t know that. Most people are living in a reality shaped by what political scientists call pluralism I, where decisions are made in local government based upon voter preferences. (see Robert Dahl Who Governs? about NewHaven Conn in the 1950s) However, even the most right wing political scientists admit the the reality is much closer to so called Regime politics, where special interests dominate the political process locally and just a few issues are rarely influenced by the general public. (See Clarence Stone s study of Atlanta in the 1970s) Many other students of urban politics see localities dominated by economic interests, with everyone else reduced to the sideline, i.e. City Politics as a Growth Machine. In the Growth Machine the real issues are not whether the blacks should have rights or the union workers be well paid but that the city is open or even that the city is a plesant place for residents. These are only relevant if they support the Growth Machine s goal of attracting investment capital that would invest in that certain city. Because the competition for outside investment is the chief purpose of a locality and it must compete with all other cities those with the most interest in a cities sucess are the local businessmen i.e. the developers, the power company, and in the past the local newspaper. The interests of the voters/residents are irrelevant to the demands that the city must grow economically always. Cities that don t grow or dont attract national/international capital die, i.e. Detroit Cleveland et al... It is interesting that most citizens still believe in pluralism I, or that there is democracy in the city and that the politics of the city are geared to solve the problems of the residents.
Post a Comment