Comments on: Vaus proposes $100 Poway candidate spending limit

By: Guest

Guest — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 03:17:55 +0000

It is the same – Mullin did it with hard work and solid volunteers. Jim bought tree seeds…

By: guest

guest — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 01:18:17 +0000

Kevin: Cunningham's campaign efforts and the money he raised from contributors should have been enough don't you think? Did he really need to put in $20,000 more of his own money? Really??? And any way you're missing or avoiding the central issue. It isn't how much money Cunningham put into the last race or might put into this one. The issue is how he argued long and loud for keeping low campaign contribution limits supposedly so our local elections don't turn into big money affairs. It was a laudable goal until he was exposed as the biggest big money offender. If he'd kept his lips zipped there would have been no outcry. As far your claim that Boyack and Vaus are working for themselves rather than the good of Poway, that's a crock and I suspect you know it. I will grant that Cunningham done good things as a council member but how much true VOLUNTEER work has he done in the community? Not as a paid council member. You've obviously go it in for Boyack and Vauss because by any measure, except maybe yours, they are both tireless volunteers.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 01:17:20 +0000

Mullin had the support of all the old guard. He had many volunteers walking for him. Not quite the same. Yeah, I'm loyal to Jim. He's done a great job. II also donate money to numerous charities and politicians. I also have to ask why you're comments are anonymous? Hiding?

By: Guest

Guest — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:45:03 +0000

Yes you can equate outside individual and PAC contributions to self-financing. All add up to undue influence.

By: Guest

Guest — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:40:51 +0000

And Mullin? Mullin game in late in the game and managed to get elected just fine without dumping cash into his account – twice I might add. Cunningham isn't the first guy to show up late and manage to get elected without giving himself a big payday. Look Kevin we know you're Jim's old guard go to guy. I think this fall's campaign should once again be "just say no to incumbents."

By: Guest

Guest — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:37:56 +0000

You can't equate outside individual and PAC contributions to self-financing. Outside contributions can lead to outside influence; candidates can end up owing favors to outside funders. Cunningham did nothing illegal by spending his own money on his campaign. You might consider it unethical or immoral–but that is a subjective opinion. Fight to change the laws if you want–but in the meantime, don't condemn someone for running a legal campaign.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:01:04 +0000

Interesting thought process. Remember that Vaus used the publicity and lists from the recall for his campaign. Dave Grosch had the Wal Mart as his launching pad. Jim Cunningham was a total unknown when he ran and he didn't start his campaign until the Spring before the election. He could have spent his time raising money or walking house to house in Poway. He knocked on over 6000 doors and gave away 5000 baby oak trees.
That's not quite the same as buying an election. I don't see anyone saying that he's done a poor job or isn't passionate about Poway. Unlike Boyack and Vaus he's working for the community not himself.

By: Katie

Katie — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 21:22:58 +0000

Clariece, I actually do see the hypocrisy in Cunningham's opposition to increasing donor contributions. If you're self funding, limiting your opponent's ability to raise money would seem unfair.

As far as the finely tuned orchestra goes, it just seems that everything you read, see or hear about Vaus has Boyack involved in some way, like they're joined at the hip. Guess we know she's already endorsed him, so what else should we expect. If you initiated the concern over self funding, it certainly didn't take those two very long to jump in front of a camera on the issue.

Let's not throw Jeff Mangum under the bus…we have no idea how his campaign will go. So, all in all, I don't disagree with you completely on this issue, just not sure I'm as concerned as you, Vaus and Boyack seem to be. But politics is politics.

I'm finished as well.

By: clariece

clariece — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 18:13:30 +0000

Just curious Katie – do you find self-funding to be acceptable? And I don't mean a candidate who tosses a couple of thousand into a local campaign – I'm talking where any candidate triples his/her campaign fund? As far as Merrilee – I don't think she's speaking much to me since I was not so nice to her in an opinion article a couple of years back. So your assumption that we're a finally tuned orchestra is off base. I'm sure there are many who share the same political views/ideals in town with both Boyack and Vaus but that doesn't make us all co-conspirators.

I support candidates based on their transparency and honesty with their financial dealings and how they well they will serve our community. Mullin and Groesh are excellent examples of how to campaign correctly. Mangum has the potential to dump significant funds into his own campaign, as does Cunningham. My entire point all along has been, if you're opposed to increasing individual and PAC contributions, then you should also be opposed to significant self-financing. You can't argue a level playing field while putting $23,000 into your own campaign.

A level playing field should be just that.

All done.

By: Katie

Katie — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 23:59:39 +0000

Clariece dear – no worries, you couldn't burst my bubble. Who initiated the self funding issue is irrelevant. To an outsider, it just appears that the orchestra of Vaus, Boyack and Clariece is finely tuned.