• ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I wonder if once elected she would be able to get taxpayer dollars directed in such a way, or if this is activity mainly enabled by the freedom and increasingly unregulated campaign system of American politics.

    We don’t need more Glusencamp-Perez or Fetterman types in office, but if this campaign actually translates into real, meaningful policy towards the hungry and homeless (if only in Illinois)? Can’t complain, though that feels unlikely in this environment.

    • Bitswap@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      41 minutes ago

      Curious what your issues with glusencamp-perez are? I don’t live in her district, but seems like she represents her constituents fairly well for how politically split the district is…but again I’m not necessarily in the know.

    • Khanzarate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Once you’re in place and have access to tax dollars instead of campaign funds, you get them spent on things by putting that community infrastructure into place.

      One problem with that is they’re running for a collective position. In their campaign, they’re captain of their own ship. A congresswoman is more a crewmate. Greater power, but more divided.

      One thing they would be able to do, though, is never stop campaigning. They’ll be less active, as a congresswoman, but the campaign pivots to next election (which, let’s be honest, that’s already the norm, there is no break from politics anymore), and that next election can be focused on on-the-ground community campaigning the entire time.

      So, no, you won’t see the same level of activism with tax dollars, they don’t lead, but she and others that follow her can do good consistently with their position through campaign funds and fight for good in their government while that happens.