Scott Spencer’s “Silly” Altruism
Scott Spencer, a Democratic candidate for the open Congressional seat, is donating 10% of his campaign fundraising to the Food Bank of Delaware, and he is challenging all other statewide candidates to do the same, whether it be to the Food Bank of Delaware or another charity of their choosing.
While our adversaries at Resolute Determination predictably think this is silly and worthless, I think it is a worthwhile gesture. Obscene amounts of money are spent on political campaign, even in Delaware. But there is really nothing to be done about curtailing the costs of campaign, save public financing, which probably will never happen as long campaign contributions are considered a form of free speech. So, why not use some of those obscene funds raised and spent in our political campaigns year after year and give back to those in need.
Now, if you support and vote for candidates that pledge to do more for our common good, Scott Spencer’s gesture is altruistic. If greed is your primary motivation in supporting and voting for candidates (i.e. cut spending on programs that benefit other people and give me my seventh consecutive tax cut now!), then surely this gesture by Mr. Spencer is silly.
If you are a political observer with some experience, you think this move could be brilliant if it garners public attention, so as to bring in donations and forcing your opponents (Carney, Cullis, Wade) to do the same. If not, then you are forced to donate money you desperately need, for surely you do not want to renege on your own promise to donate the funds, since that would lead to negative publicity. We will have to see how this campaign tactic / altruistic gesture goes. But, if you are so inclined, feel free to donate at Scott Spencer’s website, linked above.
Huh? I have to agree that this is a fairly silly empty gesture. For one, I can donate to the Food Bank all on my own without having it go through Scott Spencer’s account. When I give money to a candidate I’m expecting them to use it for their campaign. Besides, isn’t having Scott Spencer donate my contribution to charity denying me the tax benefit of donating myself?
Damn you UI, agreeing with, almost word for word, CR at Resolute Determination. Who says Liberals always agree with each other?
LOL. I didn’t read their post.
I come down in the middle. I agree with U. I. that I donate an average of 15% of my income to charity over the last 10 years. If I donate money to a campaign, I expect it to be used to advance that cause. All that does is make it harder to raise the targeted amount of money and make it harder for people to run. It makes us more dependent on special interests or dialing for dollars. I think it is well intentioned, but misguided. Let the campaign host a fundraiser for the foodbank. That would be a better way to do it.
I think silly is a bit strong. I respect the heart behind it. It may be a good move for him because it will get him more publicity than he can buy. The best way to get a harvest is to sow seeds. You have to release the seed in order for it to grow.
I do not see other candidates going with the 10% regardless of the plublicity. What is more important is actually getting money in. Donors may not be so excited about the move. That will likely limit its appeal.
I think Hell just froze over. I agree with everything David said.
Another reason that I do not think it is silly is that it matches Mr. Spencer’s life and indentity. Investing in those who are struggling is what he does. It is also a reason that I think it will only spread to a few and not pressure everyone else to follow.
The better word is “naive”. Unfortunately, we have far too many naive politicians in Dover and in DC. We don’t need another. When I donate to a charity, it is by my choice. When I donate to a candidate, it is by my choice. I don’t mix the two and I don’t need someone to make these decisions for me. Sad…but isn’t that what Washington is trying to do for us now??? Make ALL of our decisions???
UI…I thought liberals donated to charity for altruistic reasons – not tax breaks??!!
LOL, we both have moments of being reasonable. Who says it can’t be at the same time once in awhile, U.I.
You can still appreciate the tax breaks without them being the main reason for your donation.
Never said it was the primary reason…my liberal friends tell me it should never be a reason. Again, how naive.
Typical democrat, giving away other peoples money.
I am actually concerned about some of the other implications. Scott has said that he will be putting their logo on his literature. While this is a nice gesture, doesn’t it look like the Food Bank is endorsing a candidate? Granted, it is better than Tom Carper wearing that silly jacket with all of his insurance company sponsors on it, but still.
“my liberal friends tell me it should never be a reason”
Unlike conservatives, Bill, who value received wisdom, your liberal friends came to that conclusion themselves. It does not reflect the thinking of all liberals.
What I liked about it was it was an attempt to do something different, to run a campaign a bit differently. Maybe it is a good idea, maybe it is a bad idea. But I’ll say this, the way one has to run a campaign in the United States is not so good.
Our nation was inspired by President Obama’s audacity of hope. We need to have the audacity of action to get real results right now to serve the common good if we are going to make a difference on the issues confronting our nation. As political campaigns raise and spend exorbitant amounts of money (over $2 billion in non-presidential campaigns in 2008) we have a great way to redefine politics by encouraging candidates to share 10% of their political contributions to a designated campaign charity. Many businesses hold events donating a share of the proceeds to a specific charity. If you don’t like that you don’t have to show up. In fact, anyone concerned about their tax breaks, choosing their own charity or crippling a campaign because of sending 10% to men, women and children who are hungry, homeless and hurting can choose not to make a campaign donation. As for me and my campaign, Spencer for People, I know my supporters and I will be making a difference even before Election Day. Read my speech at http://www.SpencerforthePeople.com and encourage other candidates to have the audacity of action to support this new political tradition that will create a winning way to serve those with the greatness needs in our communities regardless of the election night results. As my designated campaign charity, the Food Bank of Delaware will receive 10% of the campaign contributions, enhanced visibility and public awareness during the campaign. Anywhere their logo is used or mentioned in my campaign they required that I include the following disclaimer – “The Food Bank of Delaware does not endorse or otherwise support this candidate or any other candidate’s run for office.”
Actually, lizard, once you give someone else the money, it’s HIS money.
typical conservative: thinks everything belongs to him.
Thanks for the clarification, and for stopping by, Scott.