So the needless government shutdown of 2013 is over... who's to blame and why should we care?

Things have been pretty quiet here at the Third Party lately. But eyes have been on Washington and the general "Business As Usual" choices being made by those in office. Observing the descent into this recent government shutdown and the distractions thrown at the media in order to keep us all guessing has been very frustrating. So I am going to clear a little of this up right here and now, and actually call for some very specific action.

While at one time, the founders of this organization harbored the notion of forming a viable political alternative to the dominant parties, one which was based on reason and empathy rather than partisan dogma, it did not seem as though mainstream Americans were ready to jump on board this particular revolution. We therefore veered toward the goal of education and enlightenment, changing perspectives when possible and attempting to foster a new base of thoughtful, reasoned and educated voters. The fact that the Tea Party influence so heavily flushed through Congress in the last election cycle is evidence that our work here did not go far enough. Bearing that in mind, we are opening a Facebook page to act as our live discussion board, while keeping this site alive for commentary pieces (in this blog) and general information on the home page. It is seriously underfunded, so please do not expect frequent updates. However, change only happens when individuals act in support. And that being said, I am going to move along into the clear issues of why our government was shut down and what to do about it now.

Skirting the Limits of Campaign Finance Reform

A Political Essay by Jeffrey E. Poehlmann

Originally published on 3rdparty.org on December 15, 1998

The controversy over Presidential campaign financing has officially resurfaced. A recent New York Times article(November 29, 1998) predicts candidates will have to raise at least $22 million -- approximately $50,000 per day -- over the next two years. Author Jill Abramson goes on to suggest that loopholes are being sought and utilized by most potential candidates who wish to remain competitive.

"To raise these large unrestricted (soft money) contributions from wealthy individuals, corporations and labor unions," Abramson writes, "(politicians) are exploiting the less-restrictive political donation regulations at the state level, establishing nonprofit organizations and setting up political action committees."

Such actions undeniably shift the potential for success in favor of candidates with ready access to wealthy benefactors. Without a level playing field, qualified candidates often cannot muster the media presence required to compete in the political arena. Third parties and independents cannot hope to compete financially unless they are themselves capable of funneling private funds through similar means.