Local vs Global

In the past year or so, I have been flooded with both email and snail mail requests from a variety of groups, all wanting me to donate money to various political candidates.   This is not unusual, of course, since our political system seems to live and breath via fund-raising.   What makes these requests note-worthy is that they are for candidates who live hundreds, if not thousands, of miles from where I live.   Many times, these requests involve Congressional primaries and elections.


Groups such as "Emily's List" and "MoveOn.org" all compile lists of what they consider "progressive" candidates involved in election campaigns around the country.    The groups then solicit funds from hopefully like-minded citizens from throughout the nation.   This first issue I have with this, is I don't really appreciate it when "outsiders" attempt to influence my local elections, and I think it would be inconsistent of me to turn around and send money to candidates in other time zones.


Another issue for me is that often the solicitations contain the most superficial description of the various candidates.   I know from experience that many times I don't agree with all positions a candidate makes, but I may decide to support the candidate based on overall platform.


I have no idea if others have objections to this type of "long distance" fund raising, but I suspect that most people do not.   I'm guessing that these organizations wouldn't be sending out this kind of solicitation if they didn't produce results.  It's like spam email: if a few people didn't respond and make purchases of stuff, the spam email sent to millions of people wouldn't produce financial gain.


Still, I'm uncomfortable with the notion that people around the country think they know what's best for other people around the country.