First thing we do, kill all the political consultants!

Reading the reports of Bob Shrum (8 time loser consultant) getting paid $5 million by the Kerry campaign brings up an obvious question: why aren't these consultants fees at least partially based on whether the candidate actually wins?

How about a double-up bonus? Double your consultants fees if the candidate wins! As it is, the current consultant payment scheme the Democrats use doesn't appear to have any incentive for winning.

How are the American people to trust Democrats when they say they can manage money better than Republicans when those same Democrats keep paying millions of dollars to losers like Shrum?

(Note: Dean isn't immune from this criticism either since Joe Trippi had a similar stranglehold on that campaign's money.)

Update: Just noticed on the discussion linked above that the idea of a "win bonus" is being discussed. Someone made the valid point that such bonuses would encourage consultants to gravitate towards only sure thing candidates, thus hurting dark horses. Perhaps there is a way this could be structured that the impact of this wouldn't cause much problems but would still create the incentive necessary to get the consultants on the side of the candidate that hired them.