4 ms·

Google won't donate to members of Congress who voted against election results

8 points by jimmy2020 6y ago

hourislate 6y ago
I feel like Google and every other Corp should not be allowed to donate a single penny to any politician. This is the problem with the USA, the corps are allowed to buy the politicians and end up running the country.
- whythre 6y ago
  I feel like such a law would have to be very carefully crafted; otherwise it would just make the money change hands a few more times before finding its way into the same pockets.
  - rkangel 6y ago
    A lot of other countries manage it fine. Even the US wasn't too bad until 2010 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC). To me it's important to separate two concepts: the ability to legally 'bribe' politicians, and the ability to spend money to get them elected. The first is difficult process to eradicate completely, but it's much less important than the second. It doesn't matter so much if politicians make decisions we don't like if we can just vote them out. To put it another way - money distorting the will of the people is a bigger problem than money distorting the will of a politician. US politicians have to be beholden to someone to get enough money to get re-elected. UK politicians don't in the same way because they are much more restricted on what can be spent on the campaign.
ratsmack 6y ago
I would like to see corporate and union donations limited again. This should have never happened. [1] [1] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-removes-limits-on-corporate-labor-donations-to-campaigns https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-removes-limit...
- crmrc114 6y ago
  Yep, we basically handed our nation to xyz corp with the highest donations. This and PACs need major reform.
gennarro 6y ago
Nothing could be worse for business than unpredictability. Predictable rule of law is of the utmost importance, so this makes sense for a large business... whether or not you think a business should have a voice in election matters.

8 points by jimmy2020 6y ago

I feel like Google and every other Corp should not be allowed to donate a single penny to any politician. This is the problem with the USA, the corps are allowed to buy the politicians and end up running the country.

whythre 6y ago
I feel like such a law would have to be very carefully crafted; otherwise it would just make the money change hands a few more times before finding its way into the same pockets.
- rkangel 6y ago
  A lot of other countries manage it fine. Even the US wasn't too bad until 2010 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC). To me it's important to separate two concepts: the ability to legally 'bribe' politicians, and the ability to spend money to get them elected. The first is difficult process to eradicate completely, but it's much less important than the second. It doesn't matter so much if politicians make decisions we don't like if we can just vote them out. To put it another way - money distorting the will of the people is a bigger problem than money distorting the will of a politician. US politicians have to be beholden to someone to get enough money to get re-elected. UK politicians don't in the same way because they are much more restricted on what can be spent on the campaign.

ratsmack 6y ago

I would like to see corporate and union donations limited again. This should have never happened. [1] [1] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-removes-limits-on-corporate-labor-donations-to-campaigns https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-removes-limit...

crmrc114 6y ago
Yep, we basically handed our nation to xyz corp with the highest donations. This and PACs need major reform.

gennarro 6y ago

Nothing could be worse for business than unpredictability. Predictable rule of law is of the utmost importance, so this makes sense for a large business... whether or not you think a business should have a voice in election matters.