The Problem with Running Millionaires for Office

The problem is simply this: many people who have made a lot of money haven’t been ethical about it (or even legal). That’s why I’m surprised we haven’t seen more ads like this:

In Ohio, Representative Betty Sutton calls her Republican rival, Tom Ganley, a “dishonest used-car salesman” who has been sued more than 400 times for fraud, discrimination, lying to customers about repairs, overcharging them and endangering their safety. She warns voters, “You’ve heard the old saying, buyer beware!”

In Arizona, Representative Harry E. Mitchell accused his opponent David Schweikert of being “a predatory real estate speculator who snatched up nearly 300 foreclosed homes, been cited for neglect and evicted a homeowner on the verge of saving his house, just to make a buck.”
In New York, Representative Michael Arcuri introduces his Republican challenger, Richard Hanna, as a millionaire who “got rich while his construction company overcharged taxpayers thousands, was sued three times for injuries caused by faulty construction and was cited 12 times for health and safety violations.”

Admittedly, bashing the rich doesn’t work for Republicans (although they’ve never been sticklers for rhetorical consistency, to say the least). But many Democrats could and should do this more often.

This entry was posted in Bidness, Democrats. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The Problem with Running Millionaires for Office

  1. BaldApe says:

    I pretty much automatically discount anybody who runs for elected office who cites business experience as a qualification. Not only because IMHO it requires a measure of dishonesty and ruthlessness to be successful in business, but because the skill set in business is so completely opposed to the skill set in governing.
    “You can’t even run your own life,
    I’ll be damned if you’ll run mine.”

  2. NewEnglandBob says:

    Unfortunately, nice guys finish last. The Dems need to be less nice.

  3. Chromosome.Crawl says:

    How polite not to mention Meg Whitman! (/sarcasm) I am wondering how the “illegal immigrant housekeeper” issue will play out in the remaining weeks of the campaign here in CA. Kind of a big “FAIL” to throw a presser denying any knowledge of your housekeeper’s immigration status only to be followed by a presser where a govm’t letter with a note in your hubby’s handwriting is trotted out. D’Oh!

  4. Thegoodman says:

    The situation isn’t as black/white as this. While running a successful business might not be the same as running a successful term in office, they are related. Political offices control millions of dollars of spending and the person calling the shots needs to be business savy to keep us out of bankruptcy (i.e. George W. Bush).

Comments are closed.