3 ms·
I don't think anyone's doubting the $3/month figure - most people could spare that. It's the "getting 100% of registered voters to participate" part that has ma
by JimmyL 17y ago
I don't think anyone's doubting the $3/month figure - most people could spare that. It's the "getting 100% of registered voters to participate" part that has many people thinking you're overreaching slightly.
For the most part, the people that currently donate to political organizations will keep donating to those same organizations - they're happy with them, they voluntarily chose to donate to them, and they will need a lot of convincing to move their donor-dollars. So you're going to need to get people who don't currently donate money for political purposes to join your effort, and have their money used to pay for corporate lobbyists. How?
- espeed 17y agoYou don't have to get 100% of registered voters to participate. For one thing, if someone gives more than $3 then that means you need less people to contribute. But more importantly, the top corporate donor is AT&T (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/index.php http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/index.php) -- if you click on AT&T's name, you will see that AT&T contributed $4.5 million total in 2008. At $3 per month, that's only 125,366 users. The $3 per month per registered voter is to outspend all contributors and all lobby expenditures combined -- including what individuals gave. You don't need to raise that much to be an influential player.