The price of admission for political victory has become ridiculous

I will say right up front that I do not have a solution for one of the few growth sectors in our economy. You might be wondering if I really meant to say that.

The answer is yes, because I am speaking of the growth in expenditures being made throughout this country to purchase a position in the political offices — from the White House on down.

Before we became an independent nation, it was more often the case that the “landed gentry” would be found in positions of governance by receiving those positions by appointment of the English king; lesser positions were then awarded to those of less affluence.

After we gained our independence and embarked on the democratic process, it became possible for the ordinary citizen to attain prominent positions in the various echelons of government.

Now, with the advent of political action committees and other powerbrokers, we are witnessing the explosion of costs associated with “winning” — why is it winning and not earning? — a position at each level of government.

The non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics has put the cost for the contests for the White House and Congress at $5.3 billion for the 2008 cycle, with the White House costing $1.6 billion alone. The center also reports that lawyers and their employees donated $181 million; employees of securities and investment firms donated $123 million; real estate interests $106 million and health care professionals $70 million — a rather interesting group in view of the events of the past year or so.

By the way, the center also reports that about 10 percent of the tax filers check the box to have $2 of their taxes go toward the elections. The cost for the 2004 cycle was approximately $4.2 billion, so we had a 25-percent increase from that cycle to the last.

As one would expect, the costs for “off year” elections are substantially lower, with the 2006 elections running some $2.8 billion — and that was split almost evenly between the Democratic and Republican parties. That election involved 472 federal positions.

The 2002 cycle cost approximately $2.2 billion, so we see that the increase in costs for “off year” elections have also increased approximately 25 percent between cycles.

The center offers the opinion (as of the 2006 elections) that you cannot win a House of Representatives seat when spending less than $1 million (on the average), unless your opponent gets caught up in a scandal of some sort.

They also indicate that a Senate seat requires about $5.9 million.

So, in the case of a House member, he is spending an average of $500,000 per year to get elected for a salary (rank and file member) of $174,000, and a senator is spending just under $1 million per year for that same $174,000.

Ah, but the perks that come with the position, they are unbelievably good. And would you believe it, most continue, even if a member is ousted and convicted of a felony? (That is taxpayer money we are talking about!)

As Andrew Jackson (not a particular favorite of mine due to his appalling treatment of the Cherokee) said: “Every man is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add … artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities and exclusive privileges … .the humble members of society … have a right to complain of the injustice of their government.”

Bayne’s column runs every Sunday on the editorial page.