For Obama and Romney, every (wealthy) town counts
AP Photo/Julie Jacobson
News Analysis
(CBS News) On Monday, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney announced a swing state bus tour designed to showcase his commitment to "the everyday concerns of the American people." The implicit message of the "Every Town Counts" bus tour: President Obama may be ignoring small-town Americans facing economic hardship, but I'm focused on their plight.
Mr. Obama, meanwhile, has stressed that he isn't focused on helping the wealthy - among them those he once called "fat cat bankers" - arguing that his primary concern is those Americans just trying to get by. "In this country, prosperity has never trickled down from the wealthy few," he said in April. "Prosperity has always come from the bottom up, from a strong and growing middle class."
Yet for two men who profess to be focused on average Americans, the two major party candidates for president spend an awful lot of their time with rich people.
Mr. Obama is expected to raise at least $3.6 million at six fundraisers in Baltimore and Philadelphia today, among them two $40,000 per person "campaign roundtables." CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller reports that Mr. Obama will, by day's end, have done 160 fundraisers since filing for re-election last April. That includes attending fundraisers on roughly one third of weekdays over the past month. While some of these events have been relatively low cost to attend - though $250 per person is hardly pocket change for the average American - many have required donations of $10,000 or more, particularly for those seeking a brief moment with the president.
Romney, who raised about $3 million during high-dollar fundraisers last night in Atlanta, will host campaign events in Florida today where ticket range from $2,500 to $50,000, an official told CNN. The Romney campaign often keeps its fundraisers off its public schedule, so any accounting of his fundraising activities will be incomplete. But each week brings plenty of new examples to point to. The "Romney Victory" committee's latest national finance events schedule, obtained by Politico, shows 16 fundraising events currently planned over the next month, including stops in The Hamptons, Aspen and Jackson Hole. As The Salt Lake Tribune first reported, Romney has invited high-dollar donors to an upcoming daylong retreat in Deer Valley later this month.
Both candidates have held events with wealthy celebrities like George Clooney (who supports Mr. Obama) and Donald Trump (who supports Romney), neither of whom would seem to have much insight into the plight of average Americans. They both offer perks to their biggest donors like discussing political strategy or sharing a dinner with them. All the fundraising activity means that Mr. Obama and his challenger spend a significant portion of their time with wealthy donors in the richest areas of the country instead of with the more typical Americans that Romney plans to spotlight on his bus tour. It's a reality that was underlined recently when the Obama campaign released a video featuring Vogue Editor Anna Wintour discussing a fundraising dinner she is co-hosting with actress Sarah Jessica Parker - on the same day that Americans learned of a disappointing jobs report which showed the unemployment rate ticking up to 8.2 percent.
It's only fair to point out that, in the modern campaign era, the candidates have little choice but to spend a significant chunk of their time courting wealthy donors. The amount of money now flowing through politics is staggering, and the candidates need to maintain a tireless fundraising pace to keep up with the competition. In May alone, Romney's camp raised $76.8 million along with the Republican National Committee, while the Obama team and the Democratic National Committee raised $60 million. Between the candidates themselves and the outside groups empowered to influence elections by the Supreme Court, more than $2 billion is expected to be spent on the 2012 campaign, making a mockery of the once-heralded public funding system that Mr. Obama rejected in the 2008 cycle, when he raised $750 million. While the campaigns like to stress how many small donors contribute to their campaigns, they spend much of their time appealing to the wealthy and connected "bundlers" they depend on for large contributions.
The candidates do sometimes take time to visit factories and other venues, or hold town hall events, where they come in brief contact with average Americans. But such visits are often book-ended by fundraisers, and overall both men appear to get far more exposure to the tiny subset of Americans at the top of the economic spectrum. The candidates themselves - one a multi-millionaire businessman and the other an incumbent president - would surely argue they can maintain their perspective despite the bubble they often find themselves in. They'd say that their rivals are wrong when they cast them as out of touch, arguing that they can still get a feel for the problems facing struggling Americans. But it's hard not to wonder just how well they can do so when on any given day they are far more likely to find themselves inside a Ritz-Carlton than a Wal-Mart.
Popular in Politics
- Obama forgets to salute while boarding Marine One Play Video
- The Ted Cruz conundrum
- Petraeus biographer regrets affair
- Senators lack votes on immigration despite progress
- Senator: Oklahoma "hit hard, but we're not knocked out"
- IRS' Lerner was asked to resign, refused: GOP Sen. 204 Comments
- As summer approaches, sequestration threatens holiday fun
- GOP Rep.: Obama elected because of Reagan's immigration reforms
There are three good books that every voter should read: Winner Take All Politics: How Washington Made The Rich Richer And Turned It's Back On The Middle Class by Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, Throw Them All Out by Peter Schweizer, and Greedy Bastards by Dylan Ratigan. They will open your eyes to the real corruption of Congress and they will make you want to "tar and feather" all of them. NOT ONE OF THEM DESERVES TO GET OUR VOTE EVER AGAIN. Any halfway intelligent honest person would be better in Congress than the lot we have now or have had for the last 30 years.
I hear so many voters who despair about which candidate for President would be the lesser of two evils. And many just follow the "party line" because they think the President has the ability to "cure all ails" and they don't see it happening. But Congress IS THE REAL PROBLEM. Congress legislates the laws, votes the taxes, appropriates money, and determines what bills pass or fail or don't even come up for vote. And Congress has been corrupted by big banks and big money. And Congress is where the voter needs to make the change.
All is not lost though. Every voter needs to RESOLVE that they will vote out EACH AND EVERY incumbent Congressperson when they come up for reelection. NONE OF THEM HAS SHOWN THEMSELVES WORTHY OF THE TRUST OF THE AMERICAN VOTER, AND THEY ALL NEED TO GO.
But you ask, "How does this give us (the voter) back OUR power?" It shows Congress that we are smarter and that we will no longer put up with being considered 2nd class citizens. It shows Congress that they have lost our respect and we no longer consider them worthy of holding office. AND IT SHOWS "BIG MONEY" THAT NO MATTER HOW MUCH MONEY THEY GIVE TO CANDIDATES, WE WILL VOTE THOSE WHO DON'T SERVE THE REAL AMERICANS out of office. Big money has no power if WE THE VOTER DON'T SELL THEM OUR VOTE. Just think how much better our economy would be if big business was investing in business instead of "buying votes". Just think how much better our economy would be if Congress was obligated to the welfare of the people instead of the "big money" campaign contributors.
Judging by the work George Clooney has done for tribal Africa and the filming he did in the poor areas of the world, I believe he is a bit more insightful of the less fortunate than "the Donald".