[EL] Campaign finance reform and life expectancy

[JBoppjr at aol.com]

Agreed.  That is what puzzles me about the "reformers" insisting that  it 
is always about the money.  Jim
 
 
In a message dated 5/6/2012 1:08:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
douglasrhess at gmail.com writes:

But as a  counterfactual it won't work if other factors play a role, too. 
I.e., similar  outcome from differing forces/factors. E.g., farm-labor party 
coalitions may  be strong enough there. Of course, policy making is 
inherently complex and  chaotic, and money likely plays a different role in 
different systems,  policies, public attention, and dozens of other things. 
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone, powered by CREDO Mobile.
 
____________________________________
From: JBoppjr at aol.com 
Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 09:08:14 -0400 (EDT)
To: <douglasrhess at gmail.com>
Cc: <soren.dayton at gmail.com>;  <law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] Campaign finance reform and life  expectancy


Doug, sorry I wasn't clear; let me explain.
 
"Reformers" have long argued that if you take money out of politics --  
ideally through public funding -- then the influence on money goes down and we  
won't have things like sugar subsidies.  As I just pointed out, not  so.  
Europe with public funding of elections have a ton of it.  Jim  Bopp
 
 
In a message dated 5/5/2012 7:44:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
douglasrhess at gmail.com writes:

I'm  not sure what your comment is meant to show: is this meant to increase 
or  lessen one's belief that money plays a role? 

BTW, if the example I  gave of US policy affecting non-US citizens does not 
fit the bill for some  there are plenty of examples of agriculture interest 
groups launching  campaigns to influence domestic nutrition policy on a 
host of issues; for  some of which nutritionists and public health officials 
would certainly be  on the other side. 

Doug

On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 6:17 PM, <_JBoppjr at aol.com_ (mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com) 
> wrote:


Actually they have way more socialism, government subsidies of  business, 
crony capitalism than we do.  Jim Bopp
 

 
In a message dated 5/5/2012 1:43:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
_soren.dayton at gmail.com_ (mailto:soren.dayton at gmail.com)  writes:

EU  level elections are entirely government funded. Surely you are not  
asserting that they have policies on trade with Africa or agricultural  
subsidies that are categorically better than ours, are you?
Sent from  my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original  Message-----
From: Doug Hess <_douglasrhess at gmail.com_ (mailto:douglasrhess at gmail.com) >
Sender: _law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_ 
(mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu) 
Date:  Fri, 4 May 2012 17:15:44 
To: <_law-election at department-lists.uci.edu_ 
(mailto:law-election at department-lists.uci.edu) >
Subject:  [EL] Campaign finance reform and life  expectancy

_______________________________________________
Law-election  mailing list
_Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu_ 
(mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu) 
_http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election_ 
(http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election) 

_______________________________________________
Law-election  mailing list
_Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu_ 
(mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu) 
_http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election_ 
(http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election) 










-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120506/8be072a5/attachment.html>