Obama’s fundraising switch raises eyebrows; and flood control requires new tacticts

June 22nd, 2008 at 09:43pm Chuck Sweeny

This is my Sunday, June 22 column. I’ve decided to start posting the column for those of you who would rather read the blog. I invite your comments, as always.

Chuck

RRSTAR.COM

Posted Jun 21, 2008 @ 08:07 PM

---

Barack Obama raised eyebrows last week when he reversed course and refused taxpayer funding for his presidential campaign. The Illinois Democrat could have received about $85 million from you and me, but that would have stopped him from raising more money on his own. Republican John McCain is accepting our tax dollars.Unlike the nominees, political parties can raise as much money as they like, and Republicans traditionally outraise Democrats. The so-called “527” groups that are not technically affiliated with the candidates can do the same. Clear advantage: McCain.

But Obama has mastered the art of Internet fundraising to counteract the GOP’s deep pockets. He garnered 1.5 million contributors, many of them giving small amounts of money. Obama could raise $500 million this way for the general election.

He’ll need the money, too. While I expect McCain to run a clean campaign, others won’t. Many people on the right are reluctant to back McCain, who has moderate tendencies. But they are absolutely panicked over the prospect of an Obama presidency.

Check it out. Just tune into an AM radio station and listen to some syndicated talk shows. The hosts are apoplectic that Obama is about to become the Democratic nominee. And this isn’t their usual critique of liberalism, which often makes you think. Rather, this is what sheer, “barbarians at the gate” panic sounds like. The shows reach tens of millions of voters. (And if you’re wondering, I’m not for censorship.)

You may not like Obama’s policies. I don’t like about half of them. But come on, folks. Obama is no radical. He is a mainstream Democrat in the tradition of the only president to be elected four times: Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who reformed the American free enterprise system just enough to stop a socialist revolution. He had a funny name, too.

The recent floods are being blamed by some on climate change, the politically correct flavor of the month. More likely, the cause is a combination of factors. We can’t stop climate change in the short term, but we can halt irresponsible development along our nation’s rivers and streams.

I believe that we are paving over and building on too many acres of land that nature designed to absorb rainfall. Look for yourself. The rain falling on your lawn soaks in. The rain falling on your driveway cascades down to the street, into a storm drain and to a river. As nature’s lawns — flood plains — are replaced by concrete, more water heads to creeks and rivers, which overflow their banks and engulf homes, farms and businesses.

Holding ponds are required in many new developments, but they alone can’t solve the problem. Chronic flooding zones can be turned into benign parkland, as Rockford is doing in the Churchill Park area and Machesney Park is considering in parts of the village.

Some wetland progress was made along the Mississippi River after 1993’s “500-year flood.” But as U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin noted Friday while looking out at flooded homes near Machesney Park Village Hall, the 500-year flood is back.

You can’t blame people for building on land that hasn’t flooded before. That’s why we must reform land use policy to protect remaining flood plains, restore some that we destroyed, and create new ones. Either that, or Uncle Sam can prepare to write more and more FEMA checks.

Entry Filed under: obama/floods