> Candidates should be able to take donations but only from real citizens, and only up to a certain limit. This is already the case in the US. Candidates can o

> Candidates should be able to take donations but only from real citizens, and only up to a certain limit. This is already the case in the US. Candidates can only take donations that are tied to individuals, and up to a specified limit per donor. And those lists (along with their employers) are all publicly disclosed, to ensure that companies cannot funnel donations illegally through their employees. (Incidentally, that's not true in many European countries, where corporations are allowed to donate directly without having to tie that money to an individual). > Where do you think pac's get most their money? From corporations, billionaires, special interests..you think small donor's donate to most pacs? There are a whole lot of PACs that are focused on specific issues relevant to particular demographics. For these groups, this is literally the only way for them to launch coordinated and organized campaigns to advocate for themselves, because none of their members is independently wealthy enough to fund it directly. Oftentimes, they're speaking up about issues that don't have the support of any elected official in the first place, and publicizing their message is the important first step towards building up the public pressure to get some elected officials on their side in the first place. If you take that away from them, you're basically saying that they should have no right to speak out about the issues that affect them, but their well-funded, well-organized corporate opponents, billionaire self-funded candidates, and wealthy incumbent politicians all can.