3 ms·

That won't work at all. There is no way to anonymize the donations. You can always just tell the rep. "That donation you received on such and such a date for su

by timtadh 15y ago

That won't work at all. There is no way to anonymize the donations. You can always just tell the rep. "That donation you received on such and such a date for such and such an amount was me."

snprbob86 15y ago
This was discussed on an interview with a Harvard ethics professor on The Daily Show recently: (Part 1 of 2) http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/exclusive---lawrence-lessig-extended-interview-pt--1 http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/exclu... (Part 2 of 2) http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/exclusive---lawrence-lessig-extended-interview-pt--2 http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/exclu... Discussion of anonymity is in part 2 at 5m35s. tl;dw: A) Require that all donations are anonymous B) Hold donations for a minimum delay C) Distribute donations randomly over a period of time D) Allow donators to revoke their donations secretly during the distribution delay Apparently, this was tried with judges in Florida and no one donated anything. It worked _too_ well.
- eftpotrm 15y ago
  Well, wouldn't a complete elimination of bribery be a good thing? Call me old-fashioned, but if the complaint was 'it put taxes up', I'd rather see a tax-funded than bribery-funded system.
- maxxxxx 15y ago
  I don't think you can generalize that. As far as I remember Obama got a lot of small donations in 2008 and as a small donor your donations are pretty much anonymous. You don't get any special access for your $100 or less. But people still donated. Maybe the big donors would go away but I am fine with that.
danssig 15y ago
That problem is easy to fix. The problem it won't fix is that the real bribery is when these guys are given jobs in the same industry for outrageous salaries (compared to market for similar positions).

3 ms·

That won't work at all. There is no way to anonymize the donations. You can always just tell the rep. "That donation you received on such and such a date for su

by timtadh 15y ago

That won't work at all. There is no way to anonymize the donations. You can always just tell the rep. "That donation you received on such and such a date for such and such an amount was me."

snprbob86 15y ago
This was discussed on an interview with a Harvard ethics professor on The Daily Show recently: (Part 1 of 2) http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/exclusive---lawrence-lessig-extended-interview-pt--1 http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/exclu... (Part 2 of 2) http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/exclusive---lawrence-lessig-extended-interview-pt--2 http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/exclu... Discussion of anonymity is in part 2 at 5m35s. tl;dw: A) Require that all donations are anonymous B) Hold donations for a minimum delay C) Distribute donations randomly over a period of time D) Allow donators to revoke their donations secretly during the distribution delay Apparently, this was tried with judges in Florida and no one donated anything. It worked _too_ well.
- eftpotrm 15y ago
  Well, wouldn't a complete elimination of bribery be a good thing? Call me old-fashioned, but if the complaint was 'it put taxes up', I'd rather see a tax-funded than bribery-funded system.
- maxxxxx 15y ago
  I don't think you can generalize that. As far as I remember Obama got a lot of small donations in 2008 and as a small donor your donations are pretty much anonymous. You don't get any special access for your $100 or less. But people still donated. Maybe the big donors would go away but I am fine with that.
danssig 15y ago
That problem is easy to fix. The problem it won't fix is that the real bribery is when these guys are given jobs in the same industry for outrageous salaries (compared to market for similar positions).