congressional candidates

This will be an interesting case to watch

The Supreme Court announced yesterday that it will review the constitutionality of the so-called Millionaires' Amendment, which allows opponents of some self-funded congressional candidates to raise more money than federal law normally allows.

The court's decision would come in time to affect the 2008 congressional campaigns.

The law is being challenged by Democrat Jack Davis, who lost in 2004 and 2006 to Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (R-N.Y.). In the 2006 race, Davis spent more than $2.2 million of his own money, and lost 52 percent to 48 percent.

I know a simple solution to this - public financed campaigns! It's supposed to be a democracy, not an auction.

We constantly hear that our troops favor the Republican position of staying
the course in Iraq. If that is the case then why is it most Iraq vets running
for Congress in '06 are running as Democrats? Just take a look at these numbers
from

Mother Jones:

That is 9 out of 11, or 82%,  congressional candidates in '06 running on
the Democrat ticket. I am not going to down the Republicans running that are
veterans. All these men are exceptional. They have served our country in the
most diligent way, by fighting for it, and they wish to continue to serve our
country by leading it. It is just somewhat shocking that so many of those vets
who are running are Democrats. What does that say for the Republican Party? The
answers should be interesting.