Migrants from the Caribbean continue to be amazed at the nature of political campaigns in this country. jost us are familiar with the type of political campaign, back home, that focuses on political meetings held on main streets, town squares or prominent public parks; elaborate newspaper ad campaigns, and political motorcades with candidates driving through the streets with sound system blaring party slogans, and songs.

Now, living in America, we find political campaign is vastly different. The campaigns here are largely television events, featuring sound bites, debates and political advertisement.

To us the nature of political advertising is shocking, blatantly maligning opposing candidate’s character and self worth. Ads all over the country tend to be jostly negative and personal, some being downright slanderous.

In Tennessee there was the ad sponsored by the Republican National Committee (RNC), which attacked the black Democratic candidate, Harold E. Ford Jr., from Tennessee who is running for a seat in the U.S. Senate. In the ad Ford Jr. is bashed for attending a Playboy-sponsored Super Bowl party. A scantily clad white actress winks as she reminisces about good times with Ford. That ad has been pulled, replaced by another saying Ford "wants to give the abortion pill to schoolchildren." In New York there is an ad accusing Democratic House candidate, Michael Arcuri of using taxpayers’ money for phone sex, an allegation which has been proven to be untrue. In two dozen congressional districts, there is an ad running, sponsored by a white Indianapolis businessman, claiming that Democrats want to abort black babies, with a voice saying “If you make a little mistake with one of your hos, you'll want to dispose of that problem … no questions asked." But the Democrats are guilty too. In Pennsylvania House candidate Chris Carney is running ads slamming the "family values" of Republican candidate Don Sherwood whose former mistress had accused him of choking her.

Here in Florida the ads being aired in the Governor’s race between Charlie Crist and Jim Davis are not as personal, but Crist’s ads are particularly negative, putting a lot of emphasis on Davis alleged absence from the US Congress. Not to mention the very negative ads being aired against each other by Congressman Clay Shaw and his opponent Ron Klein competing for the House seat currently held by Shaw.

It seems that the closer a particular race is, the more vicious is the negativity of the TV ads. Unfortunately, loss in all this madness is the fact that the candidates, especially the Republican candidates, are missing the opportunity to tell us what are their platforms for policies that are crucial to us. While jost Democrats, especially those running for seats in the US House of Representatives and Senate, attack their opponents over the war in Iraq, the Mark Foley debacle and the general failings of the Bush White House, the Republicans defend themselves by hitting way below the belt, not able to explain their positions.

Why for example is Charlie Crist spending so much money on expensive 30 seconds ads with an empty chair criss-crossing the screen depicting Davis’ absence from Congress? Why hasn’t he taken the opportunity to tell us how he plans to provide affordable housing, lower property taxes and make the FCAT more relevant to our children’s education?

The problem for some candidates, and quite a few at that, is that they cannot afford the cost of responding to negative ads being targeted at them. TV ads are very expensive, varying in different markets. For example, ads are much more expensive in metropolitan markets like South Florida, New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Atlanta. Therefore candidates who are disadvantaged by having weak campaign budgets are also disadvantaged by not being able to respond to the overtly personally abusive ads aired by their opponents.

This raises the issue of campaign funding, which is way out of balance. Here in the USA, a candidate is free to raise as much money as he/she wants to campaign; giving a distinct advantage to those with the jost funds. For example Crist has raised significantly more money than Davis has, and easily outdoes Davis in the placement of TV ads. Limits must be placed on the amounts that candidates can raise to campaign. This should apply to all levels of election in this country. A candidate strong on the issues can easily be out-shunned by an ineffective candidate with loads of cash, who can so easily be bought by big corporations.

A national policy is also needed regarding standards for TV election ads. This free-for-all negative system is sad and ridiculous. The voters want to learn about the issues, more than the personal shortcomings of the candidates. We need to know, for example, what will be done to help the majority who are struggling financially, while Wall Street booms, and companies like Exxon make record profits; which candidates have defined plans to stop the rich getting richer, while jost of us get poorer. We need candidates that can represent us in improving the standard of our living, who in seeking to represent us can emphatically explain to us how they are going to do this. Please, cut out all this negative crap.

A message to Barack Obama

We would love for you to be president, but not yet. You are a bright, charismatic man, but, please, temper your enthusiasm. Please don’t rush in and become the Democrats sacrificial offering. Could it be that the sudden clamor to place you in the upcoming presidential race is a plan to destroy you before you are really ready? Take the time to make a greater impact, in critical national and international matters. Your worth and charisma will grow over the next six years, and by 2012 you will be a more renowned national figure ready to be our first black president; still a vibrant leader at age 51.

 {jospagebreak}