Campaign finance reform

Fuck "reform," the problem is that such a thing as campaign finance even exists. Nobody including the candidates themselves should be allowed to influence the outcome of an election by spending money on it.

In France, every candidate for an office gets an equal allotment of free TV time. No reason why that can't work here.

We need a SCOTUS that will overturn, not only Citizens United, but Buckley v. Valeo. Money =/= speech. As Michael Lind put it, in a crowded auditorium, it is no infringement of free speech to demand that Douglas will not be allowed to use a bullhorn unless Lincoln has one as well.

In the UK, each candidate has a set amount that can be spent in the constituency. There has been a recent court case about how much was spent by the candidate and how much was spent by the central party on national campaigning.

The central parties' funding has to be declared including where the money came from. The Conservative Party gets most of its money from Industrialists; the Labour party from the Trades unions. Both have paid memberships as well but their money is less than other donors.


It makes it difficult for other candidates from the Liberal Democrats or Greens etc to spend as much as their limit. They have to raise the funds however they can. the Greens used crowdfunding successfully but their funds were much less than even the Liberal Democrats.

But no UK party spends as much as the US parties.

One problem is that any candidate for office in the U.S. has to win a "wealth primary," must secure sufficient donor-funding to be taken seriously. That only perpetuates the political power of the plutocracy. Not seldom, the deep-pocket donors contribute to both candidates, so that whoever wins will owe them. But generally, their influence tends to the Republican side. Both parties are owned by the corporations -- the difference is that the Dems are not wholly owned.

I notice, by the way, that this is not an issue on which the Dems are even fighting, lately. There is nothing about campaign finance reform in the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.

The ACLU is for campaign finance reform, and so is the Brennan Center for Justice.

After the economy crashes, both parties will be on tighter budgets. We will have reform by train wreck.

This is the United States, not Europe.

The ability to raise money is considered to be a
direct function of your ability and viability as a candidate.

It is, in a Capitalist Democracy, the purest form of free speech.

I've seen this lament many, many times, but it always rears up when
the Republicans managed to out-raise the Democrat Billionaire's club.

The thing that needs to be looked at more closely
is Big Tech and the Media's in-kind contributions
which is shadow money underneath the table
used to sway elections to the Democrats...

Those contributions come in the form of slanted and fake news
coupled with Social Media banning the content and speech of conservatives
who manage to garner large followings and become a threat via influencing ability.
Both of these groups should be impartial, but they've decided instead to become crooked referees.

The money you see is less dangerous to individual Liberty
than the money you don't see (under the sea chumming the waters)...

Champakian said:

This is the United States, not Europe.

Click to expand...

Not so different. There is nothing unique about America.

Which is always a very important thing to keep in mind.

oggbashan said:

But no UK party spends as much as the US parties.

Click to expand...

Why is that, I wonder?

I presume you mean, even adjusted for size of population.

Champakian said:

The money you see is less dangerous to individual Liberty
than the money you don't see (under the sea chumming the waters)...

Click to expand...

There is certainly a lot of Dark Money -- most of it going to the RW.

One of the most hilarious spectacles on the political Intertubes is David Horowitz' Discover the Networks, tracing out financial and organizational connections on the left -- as if all of that taken together amounted to anything that mattered!

Champakian said:

. . . the Democrat Billionaire's club.

Click to expand...

You must realize that the Soroses and Buffetts of American politics are marginal and insignificant compared to the Kochs and Scaifes.

Champakian said:

TThe thing that needs to be looked at more closely
is Big Tech and the Media's in-kind contributions
which is shadow money underneath the table
used to sway elections to the Democrats...

Click to expand...

What reason have those entities to favor the Dems? Reporters might be liberal in the sense that they all dream of playing Jack-the-Giant-Killer, but they and their editors answer to the giants, i.e., to MBAs in suits who sit on the boards of interlocking directorates. And Big Tech has not even that liberalizing element.

Chernosoth said:

After the economy crashes, both parties will be on tighter budgets. We will have reform by train wreck.

Click to expand...

What makes you think it's about to crash?