No person, corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office.Of course, that's not really the end of the discussion. It would be a giant step. But, what role would media play? We would still have free speech. If the major media could broadcast their opinions and choose which facts to report and which not to report, then we'd simply be ushering in the Era of Big Media. Perhaps the root of the problem is simple demographics. We are a country of almost 300 million people, many of whom actually vote. It takes Big Money to win over such a Big Population. And it's a high stakes game.
October 24, 2011
Campaign Reform: A (Partial) Solution
It is overwhelming to review the data and analysis provided by others concerning the influence of big money in politics. The fun part is coming up with solutions. Campaign spending limits are at the top of many such discussions. But this got me to thinking about the benefits of political campaigns. Are there any? It's a bit extreme, but I would like to see a list of candidates, their resumes, a short video, and their detailed position papers rather than have to witness the mudslinging of a political campaign. Is there anyone who believes that the $3.6 billion spent for the 2010 midterm federal elections was money well spent? So, why bother putting a limit on campaign spending? Just make it illegal. End of discussion. Figuring that someone else has probably worked this out already, I perused the internet and found the Get Money Out Foundation. They are considering trying to pass the following constitutional amendment -