3 ms·

Individual people already have a limit: https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/limits.php https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/limits.php That said, allowing onl

Individual people already have a limit: https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/limits.php https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/limits.php That said, allowing only individual entities to donate would be an improvement. But money would still find its way through, in unlimited amounts, through 1. SuperPACs, which are not allowed to communicate with a candidate, technically, but can receieve an infinite amount of money to further interests that are functionally identical to the candidate's interests (i.e. running pro-candidate ads), and 2. Lobbying. TurboTax can still spend millions to hire people to engage with politicians and bribe/convince them to see it TurboTax's way.

nickpsecurity 10y ago
Both solved by only allowing politicians in office to receive money directly from individuals at the rate limit and of course their pay checks. SuperPAC's can't give them money. Lobbyists can't give them money. That eliminates large part of the incentive. There's other to tackle such as advertising. One way to do that might be that any paid advertisements for or against a politician must be paid for by the politician's registered donations. Corporate media might then try to offer extra due to their bias or for favors. That's an unknown right now, though, given they currently do it in exchange for the ad revenue that would go down a lot.
- Paul-ish 10y ago
  If I write a blog post gushing about some politician or attacking another, is that considered an ad or contribution?
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    Only if they paid you to do it. Keeping records of that stuff has side benefit of spotting whose full of shit. In any case, there might be an exception for blog authors who aren't celebrities because they won't have the effect of a corporate, media campaign. Huge difference between paid ads everywhere vs some bloggers talking. What you describe is already happening against major candidates but didn't change the election. Those paying to win got furthest with one winning. Hence my focus on cutting the pay or payments.
    - Paul-ish 10y ago
      Yeah, but what if someone unrelated to the candidates paid me to blog for or against a candidate?

nickpsecurity 10y ago

Both solved by only allowing politicians in office to receive money directly from individuals at the rate limit and of course their pay checks. SuperPAC's can't give them money. Lobbyists can't give them money. That eliminates large part of the incentive. There's other to tackle such as advertising. One way to do that might be that any paid advertisements for or against a politician must be paid for by the politician's registered donations. Corporate media might then try to offer extra due to their bias or for favors. That's an unknown right now, though, given they currently do it in exchange for the ad revenue that would go down a lot.

Paul-ish 10y ago
If I write a blog post gushing about some politician or attacking another, is that considered an ad or contribution?
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  Only if they paid you to do it. Keeping records of that stuff has side benefit of spotting whose full of shit. In any case, there might be an exception for blog authors who aren't celebrities because they won't have the effect of a corporate, media campaign. Huge difference between paid ads everywhere vs some bloggers talking. What you describe is already happening against major candidates but didn't change the election. Those paying to win got furthest with one winning. Hence my focus on cutting the pay or payments.
  - Paul-ish 10y ago
    Yeah, but what if someone unrelated to the candidates paid me to blog for or against a candidate?