Posted on 09/13/2012 3:00:15 PM PDT by scottjewell
Yesterday, on the way to an Intelligence Squared debate about campaign finance regulation, I happened to read a story about Roy McDonald, one of four Republican state senators who last year voted for the bill that legalized gay marriage in New York.
McDonald did so only after receiving assurances from gay rights activists who promised to help counter the expected backlash by raising money for his re-election campaign. The New York Times reports that they delivered on that promise:
"New York was the first state to legalize same-sex marriage with the support of a Republican-controlled legislative chamber, and gay-rights advocates, who have showered Mr. McDonald with campaign contributions, fear that his defeat would discourage Republican legislators in other statehouses from bucking their party to support same-sex marriage....
The race between Mr. McDonald and [Kathleen] Marchione [McDonald's opponent in today's primary] is the most expensive legislative primary in New York this year. Mr. McDonald has raised more than $926,000 in this campaign cycle, thanks in part to help from supporters of same-sex marriage, including Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who donated $10,300. Ms. Marchione, by contrast, has raised more than $180,000."
While McDonald says he voted his conscience, Marchione argues that he betrayed voters by changing his position on gay marriage, essentially selling his vote for campaign cash.
The question I posed to the audience at last night's debate (which was held at the Kaufman Center in Manhattan): Is McDonald's vote an example of the corruption that campaign finance regulations are aimed at curtailing?
The average progressive, I think, would say no: Supporters of gay marriage are simply expressing their gratitude to McDonald and showing that legislators can benefit politically by doing the right thing.
But what McDonald did arguably amounted to a quid pro quo arrangement in which he agreed to support a particular bill in exchange for campaign contributions. In form it is no different from voting against a cigarette tax hike based on promises of donations from tobacco executives or voting against environmental regulations in anticipation of support from Archer Daniels Midland's political action committee.
The only difference is that, from a progressive perspective, McDonald voted the right way.
Roy McDonald and Governor Cuomo HATE gay marriage...but they LOVE Gay Money more to keep their power and position than the love honoring their consituancy.
I resent the living hell out of both of them for this.
RINO Roy McDonald must go!
Yes, it is sickening. I had not grasped the extent of it, but now that I do, I understand the resentment against McDonald.
A close friend of mine is running the campaign for the GOP challenger DiCarlo in the primary race in the article bow. They also desperately need conservatives to turn out for DiCarlo. Soland has received hundreds of thousands for his campaign from the homo lobby:
DiCarlo challenging Senator Saland
By: Web Staff
HUDSON VALLEY — It’s primary day in New York State, and in the Hudson Valley, Republicans get a chance to pick someone to represent them in the state Senate.
Incumbent Senator Steve Saland faces challenger Neil DiCarlo for the 41st Senate seat. Saland has not had a primary challenge for office in his more than 32-year tenure as state lawmaker.
The marriage equality act has taken center stage in this race. The 12-term senator voted yes for same sex marriage last year.
Opponent Neil DiCarlo released a statement promising to “work tirelessly to restore the institution of marriage to its rightful place.”
DiCarlo filed more than 2,000 signatures with the state Board of Elections to run against Saland.
The 41st Senate seat includes all of Dutchess County, with the exception of Beekman and Pawling, and parts of Putnam County.
A vote for “Gay Marriage” is corrupt by definition!
I, for one, think there’s nothing wrong with such quid pro quo. You should be able to buy politicians all you want, just like you buy everything else. Governments shouldn’t be granting special status to gay couples, is all. Whether someone votes their conscience to allow it or is bought off, what’s the difference? Oh, you think you can control it and keep it good and pure and stop governments from being manipulated for private ends thereby? Fat chance. Has it grown more or less corrupt and extensive since do-gooders went after the root of all evil? Yeah.
Time was, when politicians were bought, they stayed bought.
And a politician that can be bought, will be. Especially when they have all that power (supposedly to do good, as you pointed out.)
Government limited to its proper functions is a lot less attractive target for corruption.
Great. I would love to see Saland kicked to the curb. Good luck to Neil DiCarlo and I hope your friend’s efforts pay out tonight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.