Campaign finance reform

If our system of democracy was intended to prioritize local interests over national interests.

WE can debate That if you like,

But if the house was intended to be reactive and the senate was intended to be deliberative.

We can debate that as well.

Does our current campaign finance system serve the original intent?

More specifically does national money being directed at local elections distort a representative democracy?

Would limiting party funding to monies collected within a restricted geographic area help or hurt our democracy. For instance if Hollywood money had to remain in California? Or Texas money had to remain in Texas?

Clarification please.

Do you mean for local elections only? Texas Governor, State Legislature, etc.?

Or do you mean U.S. Congress?

I love how Republicans are fine with the Russian government funneling money into our presidential elections but not money from other parts of the country into local elections.


What a stupid post.


If a corporation is a person, their political contributions should be the same as a person. $2800 this year. Preferably zero in my opinion………

Lobbyists are a pox on this country and everybody knows it. Politicians are literally bought and paid for with campaign contributions to the detriment of voters. The will of the voters is rarely paid any attention to, it is lobbyists and corporations who make the rules and write our laws. It needs to be stopped cold. They should not be allowed to make campaign contributions.

All voters should be able to vote in all primaries. This would force politicians to reach out to a wider spectrum of voters and over time produce less extreme partisan candidates. It’s great when your side in in power, not so great in the opposite scenario.

Three things that could change the face of politics for the better in very big ways.

1 Like

It means body of people. So $2,800 per member.

Then make it zero, they are not a person.


How are you defining member in this body of people?

Does the corporation count its shareholders, its employees, its customers… or some combination of them when it estimates its budget for “free speech”

Why not? Doesn’t a body of people have rights? Or is it just individuals?

I am confident the Founders would be sickened by the SCOTUS decisions that basically state Corporations are people. Money is speech. And Billionaires and Corps can spend as much as they like to influence elections and legislation.

Keep in mind, these are not laws passed…these are SCOTUS decisions that has dramatically harmed our democratic republic. And this all started in the late 70’s, coming to fruition with Citizens United.

Today, our representatives, represent the wealthy and corporation, not the people.

1 Like

No body of people much less and individual should be able to buy a politician and that is exactly what is happening and has been for a long time. It will precipitate our downfall.

Then what good are they?

Unbought politicians or corporations?

The former.

They can respond better to the will of the voters. They pay it lip service but the legislation they pass tells a different story. Doing what constituents want has become the exception, not the rule.

They don’t care.

Corporations already fall under campaign finance limits.

Correct and incorrect in a way.

The corporation, as a unique entity, under the same limitations as individuals. Individuals within a corporation are still free to make individual donations not at the corporate entity.

The General Motors (the corporate entity) can make a donation, the CEO of General Motors can also make in individual donation in his/her own name.

The corporate entity cannot make contributions in the name of 10,000 individuals for $2,800 ($28,000,000) that would be a violation of campaign finance restrictions.

On the other hand individuals and corporations can make unlimited donations to independent “SuperPacs”.


Which is where the fully open primaries come into play. It wii bring better candidates to the game.

Let’s get rid of primaries and the media.


And their lobbying efforts?

There are no limits on corporate influence in politics.