Dr. Martin Hash Podcast

The whole concept of campaign contributions is bizarre: the idea that people would give money to other people, most likely in a doomed attempted to gain public office, has no valid explanation outside of ego-driven delusion. How does it even work? It's got to be because people are conditioned to give to charity, and tithing to their church, or have political aspirations of their own someday and so imagine the contribution to be a kind of quid pro quo. Considering that many of these same people are adamantly against taxation and the irony couldn't be more blatant. Also, since campaign contribution amounts are capped, the result is that relatively poor people end up funding relatively rich people.

Even more unsettling is the fact that candidates, successful or unsuccessful, get to keep the donated money, either outright or as payment for being a candidate. The rules surrounding excess campaign cash vary by State but all can be skirted through how they are accounted for, but in some cases there are no restrictions at all. In Virginia, for example, politicians are not prohibited from using funds for personal expenses, such as vacations, houses, and cars. Recently, New York and Washington State lawmakers have been accused of spending campaign funds on lavish personal purchases. Surly, many candidates just wait until the smoke has cleared then retire on their campaign donation nest egg. Whatever people say they got into politics for, there's no getting past the get-rich-scheme aspect of the job.