PDA

View Full Version : The GOP National Convention - Your Tax Dollars at Work!!




derdy
01-31-2008, 02:36 AM
While researching the whole delegate and convention process as this is my first time being active in politics beyond voting, I stumbled upon this:


Q: How is the convention funded?

The Federal Election Commission provides both the Republican and Democrat Conventions with $16.3 million in federal funding. The convention's remaining costs are met by the Host Committee.

source: http://www.gopconvention.com/faq/default.aspx



It amazes me to no end what our tax dollars go towards! Isn't this a conflict of interest at the very least!?

Our tax dollars go towards maintaing the status-quo by subsidizing the the Republicans and Democrats.

derdy
01-31-2008, 12:44 PM
blimp

Anyone else going to try and make the convention? I'm committed to going as a delegate should we get enough other delegates to vote for me.

Redcard
01-31-2008, 12:59 PM
You can agree to fund this or not when you check the Funding box on your IRS form.

Jobarra
01-31-2008, 01:08 PM
You can agree to fund this or not when you check the Funding box on your IRS form.
Interesting. Why isn't every single political party in the United States on the IRS form then? It smacks of Federal supported favoritism.

Redcard
01-31-2008, 01:11 PM
Interesting. Why isn't every single political party in the United States on the IRS form then? It smacks of Federal supported favoritism.

Because to get in on this, you need to have 5% or more vote in the previous presidential election.

jkm1864
01-31-2008, 01:14 PM
Looks like Ron Paul needs to shatter this BS with a third party Run after the Republican convention.

Redcard
01-31-2008, 01:15 PM
Looks like Ron Paul needs to shatter this BS with a third party Run after the Republican convention.

One of the reasons I voted for Nader and Perot was because I wanted to have a third party.. ANY third party.. hit that magical five percent.

Jobarra
01-31-2008, 01:19 PM
Because to get in on this, you need to have 5% or more vote in the previous presidential election.
Again, favoritism. If every party must get a certain percentage in order to be on the form, then it is favoritism. If you're always in the limelight, it's pretty hard to lose that spot that gives you even more limelight.

Redcard
01-31-2008, 01:21 PM
Again, favoritism. If every party must get a certain percentage in order to be on the form, then it is favoritism. If you're always in the limelight, it's pretty hard to lose that spot that gives you even more limelight.

Then don't check the box on the tax forms that give $3.

derdy
01-31-2008, 01:21 PM
You can agree to fund this or not when you check the Funding box on your IRS form.

Nice. I've never checked that stupid box and now I'm even happier I didn't. :p

Here's a nice FAQ on the check box.

http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/checkoff.shtml

Jobarra
01-31-2008, 01:24 PM
Then don't check the box on the tax forms that give $3.
I've never checked the box, but it's still favoritism. The Federal Government is advertising the party for free and creating the illusion that somehow these are the only legitimate parties.

seapilot
01-31-2008, 01:25 PM
One of the reasons I voted for Nader and Perot was because I wanted to have a third party.. ANY third party.. hit that magical five percent.

We could get 5% of the national vote with RP. He polls around 7% currently. With more time we could get it up to 15% which is the magic number to get into debates. Choices are insane mccain or hillary many people are going to get desperate.

Ross Perot could have won I believe as he made fools of bush and clinton in the debates. He shouldnt have dropped out just when he was gaining momentem.

BreakYourChains
01-31-2008, 01:28 PM
Bump

Redcard
01-31-2008, 01:32 PM
Of all the "mystical secret plans" that I keep hearing about.. I pray that RP has actually made plans to drop out of the Republican race, go LP, and get that five percent.

I'm hoping he realizes he's not going to be president, but that he has the oppurtunity to get the ball rolling on it in a long term type situation. Remember, we don't just need a president like Ron Paul. It does no good if we have someone who can sign bills into laws, but nobody to make the good bills.

derdy
01-31-2008, 01:34 PM
So, why is Ron Paul opposed to taking matching funds? It seems to me that people donate this money for this purpose.

Also, anyone planning on trying to attend the convention as a delegate?