Should Presidents Be Wealthy?
May 13, 2003
Vice President Wandira Kazibwe trashed Nobert Mao MP Gulu Municipality ’s intention to stand for presidency in 2006. <br>
By Patrick Luganda
Vice President Wandira Kazibwe trashed Nobert Mao MP Gulu Municipality ’s intention to stand for presidency in 2006.
This sparked off the debate on wealth raging through town. She argued that Mao did not even own a hut and was too young to vie for the presidency. Should wealth determine who should stand for and become the president of Uganda?
While some think that wealth is not a pre-requisite for the highest office of the land others argue that someone without wealth will first enrich himself or herself before taking into account the development of the nation.
“A person who wants to be president should be relatively rich. A poor person does not have respect in society. Even the voters cannot make a mistake of choosing a poor presidential candidate. How will he fund his election campaign in the first place,†says Joshua Nsobya.
However, there are others who argue that the first consideration should not be about how much money or property an individual has: “In my opinion the first quality that the candidate should have is the ability to mobilise voters and the personal conduct of the individual. There are people who have wealth but are very anti-social. One may be poor but honest, making them able to safeguard the national wealth,†argues Rashid Kalyowa in Bugema, Luweero.
Although wealth is an important consideration, Tamale Mirundi, a political analyst and political commentator, says presidential candidates need money. Personal wealth and connections are important in ensuring victory.
“In practice you need money to win, but then that is considered along with other issues. Otherwise, the wealthiest person would be made president. The way forward in the national politics is for the candidate to have crucial financial mobilisers with connections to the wealthy. Presidential campaigns need billions and the wealthy will be more confident to support a well-to-do candidate,†says Tamale Mirundi
But Ken Lukyamuzi, MP for Rubaga South, says people with no individual wealth worth talking about can be voted president on the strength of the confidence the people have in the character of the person offering their candidature: “The people’s support in an individual is wealth in itself. One does not need material wealth to serve as president,†remarks Lukyamuzi.
Aggrey Awori, who vied for the presidency and lost in 2001, says the politics of individual merit have brought the issue of an individual’s wealth to the forefront. In the process, the individual character of the candidate is obscured: “If we could go back to party politics, the issue of individual wealth would not arise because the funding of the individual’s campaign would be taken care of by the party to which they belong. With the individual merit system, the voters start comparing how much wealth they have,†says Awori.
Awori goes on further to argue that there is widespread stealing from employers and public coffers: “In the early 1980s, my entire campaign was funded by my party including a car, bicycles and campaign funds. Now people are forced to steal public funds,†says Awori.
Michael Mabikke, MP for Makindye East, says he was a pauper but was elected to a position of leadership.
The same can be applied to the office of the president: “In a president we are looking for a person with ability, competence and grass-root support. It needs someone with charisma, articulate at issues in question. We also need a person who has a political backbone and does not waver. A person with a stable personality,†says Mabikke.
“The issue should be whether Ugandans will be better off or worse with Mao as President. Dr. Kazibwe is old enough to understand that leadership is not about wealth only,†said Mao.
Mao, who promises to be the flag bearer of the new generation in the 2006 elections, said the politicians who joined politics in 1986 and are now millionaires were paupers when they joined.
Awori describes the whole talk about the wealth of an aspiring president as shallow and misguided: “They should be debating poverty alleviation instead of wasting time on a misguided debate,†said Awori.
In most democracies in Europe, whose political behaviour we strive to emulate, the personal wealth of the individual candidate is overshadowed by the might of the political party that sponsors the campaigns.
Sirgud Illing, head of the European Union delegation to Uganda, says personal wealth in not an overriding issue in choosing a head of state for most countries in Europe.
“The wealth of a candidate may be coincidental. Looking at most countries in Europe, the leaders are not personally wealthy. The funding of the candidature is through parties raising membership fees and contributions from donors. There is also some state funding to all the parties,†says Sirgud Illing.
On the incumbent president using his position to access funds for campaigns, he says that there is public accountability to monitor where the candidates are sourcing their campaign funding.
“The governments do not provide a budget for the aspiring candidates even when in office. Most countries closely follow the outcome of the elections,†says Sirgud Illing.
But though the requirement of the personal wealth is not pronounced even in what we all consider advanced democracies, the question is increasingly becoming an overriding factor in determining the outcome of elections.
In the USA, one of the biggest democracies, researchers indicate that in presidential elections and congressional elections, candidates who have access to personal wealth or have a strong network of big time donors are at a distinct advantage.
“Many candidates learn that without access to big money it is almost impossible run a comprehensive campaign,†a 1999 study by Brandab Van Grack and Julia Hutchins states.
Presidential candidates Al Gore and George W. Bush raised over $115m for their campaigns with three-quarters of the money coming from maximum $1,000 contributions.
In comparison, former presidential candidate John McCain raised only a third of total funds from maximum $1,000 donors.
“In our current system, candidates who lack big money connections are finding it more and more difficult to compete with the increasing number of money-laden candidates,†say the researchers on their website www.pirg.org/elections/fullstudy
Vice President Wandira Kazibwe trashed Nobert Mao MP Gulu Municipality ’s intention to stand for presidency in 2006.
This sparked off the debate on wealth raging through town. She argued that Mao did not even own a hut and was too young to vie for the presidency. Should wealth determine who should stand for and become the president of Uganda?
While some think that wealth is not a pre-requisite for the highest office of the land others argue that someone without wealth will first enrich himself or herself before taking into account the development of the nation.
“A person who wants to be president should be relatively rich. A poor person does not have respect in society. Even the voters cannot make a mistake of choosing a poor presidential candidate. How will he fund his election campaign in the first place,†says Joshua Nsobya.
However, there are others who argue that the first consideration should not be about how much money or property an individual has: “In my opinion the first quality that the candidate should have is the ability to mobilise voters and the personal conduct of the individual. There are people who have wealth but are very anti-social. One may be poor but honest, making them able to safeguard the national wealth,†argues Rashid Kalyowa in Bugema, Luweero.
Although wealth is an important consideration, Tamale Mirundi, a political analyst and political commentator, says presidential candidates need money. Personal wealth and connections are important in ensuring victory.
“In practice you need money to win, but then that is considered along with other issues. Otherwise, the wealthiest person would be made president. The way forward in the national politics is for the candidate to have crucial financial mobilisers with connections to the wealthy. Presidential campaigns need billions and the wealthy will be more confident to support a well-to-do candidate,†says Tamale Mirundi
But Ken Lukyamuzi, MP for Rubaga South, says people with no individual wealth worth talking about can be voted president on the strength of the confidence the people have in the character of the person offering their candidature: “The people’s support in an individual is wealth in itself. One does not need material wealth to serve as president,†remarks Lukyamuzi.
Aggrey Awori, who vied for the presidency and lost in 2001, says the politics of individual merit have brought the issue of an individual’s wealth to the forefront. In the process, the individual character of the candidate is obscured: “If we could go back to party politics, the issue of individual wealth would not arise because the funding of the individual’s campaign would be taken care of by the party to which they belong. With the individual merit system, the voters start comparing how much wealth they have,†says Awori.
Awori goes on further to argue that there is widespread stealing from employers and public coffers: “In the early 1980s, my entire campaign was funded by my party including a car, bicycles and campaign funds. Now people are forced to steal public funds,†says Awori.
Michael Mabikke, MP for Makindye East, says he was a pauper but was elected to a position of leadership.
The same can be applied to the office of the president: “In a president we are looking for a person with ability, competence and grass-root support. It needs someone with charisma, articulate at issues in question. We also need a person who has a political backbone and does not waver. A person with a stable personality,†says Mabikke.
“The issue should be whether Ugandans will be better off or worse with Mao as President. Dr. Kazibwe is old enough to understand that leadership is not about wealth only,†said Mao.
Mao, who promises to be the flag bearer of the new generation in the 2006 elections, said the politicians who joined politics in 1986 and are now millionaires were paupers when they joined.
Awori describes the whole talk about the wealth of an aspiring president as shallow and misguided: “They should be debating poverty alleviation instead of wasting time on a misguided debate,†said Awori.
In most democracies in Europe, whose political behaviour we strive to emulate, the personal wealth of the individual candidate is overshadowed by the might of the political party that sponsors the campaigns.
Sirgud Illing, head of the European Union delegation to Uganda, says personal wealth in not an overriding issue in choosing a head of state for most countries in Europe.
“The wealth of a candidate may be coincidental. Looking at most countries in Europe, the leaders are not personally wealthy. The funding of the candidature is through parties raising membership fees and contributions from donors. There is also some state funding to all the parties,†says Sirgud Illing.
On the incumbent president using his position to access funds for campaigns, he says that there is public accountability to monitor where the candidates are sourcing their campaign funding.
“The governments do not provide a budget for the aspiring candidates even when in office. Most countries closely follow the outcome of the elections,†says Sirgud Illing.
But though the requirement of the personal wealth is not pronounced even in what we all consider advanced democracies, the question is increasingly becoming an overriding factor in determining the outcome of elections.
In the USA, one of the biggest democracies, researchers indicate that in presidential elections and congressional elections, candidates who have access to personal wealth or have a strong network of big time donors are at a distinct advantage.
“Many candidates learn that without access to big money it is almost impossible run a comprehensive campaign,†a 1999 study by Brandab Van Grack and Julia Hutchins states.
Presidential candidates Al Gore and George W. Bush raised over $115m for their campaigns with three-quarters of the money coming from maximum $1,000 contributions.
In comparison, former presidential candidate John McCain raised only a third of total funds from maximum $1,000 donors.
“In our current system, candidates who lack big money connections are finding it more and more difficult to compete with the increasing number of money-laden candidates,†say the researchers on their website www.pirg.org/elections/fullstudy