Make A Law To Prohibit All Negative Campaign Ads........

[global1]

When the Dems take back Congress they should put through a law that outlaws all negative campaign ads. Each candidate in every race should stand on their own merits and only tout themselves, their accomplishments, their beliefs and what they would do if they were elected into office.

All negative campaign ads - directed at their opponents should be outlawed.

I think it would change the tenor of the electoral process.

[TayTay]

1. Ah, and it would trash the First Amendment to the Constitution

I don't think that would go over very well with any voters.

[Justyce]

4. This is true, but it would be nice if they

were at least required to be truthful.... I've never in my life heard so many lies fly out of anyone's mouth until I heard Bush running for Tx Governor & then president. How he gets away with so many bold-faced lies is beyond me.

[saltpoint]

8. TayTay, you're right on the legal aspect of course, so the best

solution would be for only me and a handful of my most progressive associates to choose the candidates for both major parties.

That would obviate the need for negative advertising.

I think that's fair.
_________________
You're right on the point and I acknowledge the difficulty. Short of a full-court press on re-defining what it means to have 'character' and to lend oneself to public service, I don't know how to avoid negative attack ads. They can get extremely warped and nasty.

[Richard Steele]

2. I really don't see that as being practical or enforceable.

That would boil down to forbidding candidates to
make any mention of their opponents at all.

But I certainly appreciate the sentiment; it's
just disgusting how many candidates seem to have
no platform beyond smears and name-calling.

[saltpoint]

3. Or raise children not to conceive them in the first place if they

ever seek public office.

I know that's asking for pie in the sky, so in lieu of it, I'll take your suggestion instead.

I'm awfully disheartened to see a negative ad replace respectful discourse. Rove's name comes to mind, but there are many local Roves. Unfortunately.

[Selatius]

5. A law instituting public financing would be less risky

Your route could be struck down as unconstitutional by the SCOTUS for infringing on the 1st Amendment. It protects speech, even nonsensical speech.

The law should say that if you 1) collect a certain number of 5 dollar donations from your district to demonstrate viability and 2) agree to forego all private donations from individuals and organizations and 3) agree to abide by prescribed spending guidelines, then you are entitled to full public financing of your campaign for office.

If you are outspent by your opponent, then you should be given matching funds up to a certain point to counter the opponent.

This is basically the clean elections law the states of Arizona and Maine have instituted for the state legislature and other offices. The results are good. It has allowed more independents to run and more party candidates to run who would not have for the fact that they are too poor to sustain a major political campaign.

[Ravy]

6. It is the press not doing their job that allows them to get away

with this.

[welshTerrier2]

7. here's my little law ...

i would require campaign ads to consist only of the candidate's talking to the camera ... that's it ... no actors reading a script with a sinister tone ("if Nancy Pelosi becomes the Speaker, would your children be raped and beaten in their schools?") ... no kissing babies ... no marching bands ... no video of your opponent kicking a puppy ... no landing on aircraft carriers ...

if things are ever going to get better in this country, our candidates owe us some straight talking about exactly what they plan to do and what they value ... that's it ... just as advertisements for products are designed to distort the reality, so it is with today's campaign advertising ... we cannot afford this garbage as a nation ...

so i'd be less focussed on negative attacks and more focussed on hearing directly from the candidates without all the Madison Avenue trappings ... if one candidate has negative things to say about his or her opponent, and he takes full responsibility for saying it, that's OK with me ... some opponents deserve to be criticized ...