On campaign contributions, don't cap how much an entity can contribute, cap how much the politician is allowed to accept. Can also be a good example of how different people spend their war chest.
Also for local campaigns like congressman and state representatives ban out of state contributions.
I could support blocking campaign contributions from any entity that is outside of the constituency electing that official. It would go further than what Jack suggests.
Not sure how good that is, Jack, then someone could potentially just buy the congress person outright. give them all the money they can accept (or such a large %).
Not sure how good that is, Jack, then someone could potentially just buy the congress person outright. give them all the money they can accept (or such a large %).
To what end? They're not exactly beholden to the entity that gives them all the money they have and it isn't like they can take it back once it is spent.
The perfect is the enemy of the good, Greg. I think the level of analysis you're looking for is a level that would cause a very large majority of the nation to tune out in boredom. The proliferation of an important message is sometimes more important than the details when you're dealing with a population of hundreds of millions.
Ignoring your poor choice of article use in that first sentence, I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for proper rhetoric. I'm looking for fewer logical fallacies. The funniest parts are already what the opposition says and the contrast between that and facts, they don't need all the other garbage.
Not sure how good that is, Jack, then someone could potentially just buy the congress person outright. give them all the money they can accept (or such a large %).
Also, It wouldn't prevent entities that aren't the congressperson from campaigning on his behalf. If Congressperson Dick Fuckstick cant accept any more contributions then just donate to the "Private citizens supporting Dick Fuckstick foundation" or maybe the "Concerned election society of greater Bumfuck" which is officially unaffiliated with Mr. Fuckstick but still promotes him exclusively.
But I do prefer the Colbert Report to the Daily Show. John Stewart is a smart dude, but definitely toes the party line too closely at times.
What party line? He mostly just points out direct hypocrisy.
If you want Jon's position, go on reddit and read the memes being posted in /r/politics. His will be about identical. He's also very knee-jerk pro-Israel.
Greg, I guess you'll have to educate me on my "poor choice of article use".
"All that other garbage" sells the message to the otherwise disinterested public, which like it or not, is necessary.
ahh.... Point to his knee-jerk pro-Israelness. I'm pretty sure he has the typical, I want Israel to be better then it is position....that most liberal Jews take.
Greg, I guess you'll have to educate me on my "poor choice of article use".
"The perfect is the enemy of the good" means that things that are already perfect are the enemy of things that are already good. You should say "perfection is the enemy of quality," because that criticizes aspiration to perfection as opposed to things that are perfect. I don't mean to dismiss your argument on those grounds, but I had to read that sentence two or three times to figure out what you meant so I felt the need to address it.
"All that other garbage" sells the message to the otherwise disinterested public, which like it or not, is necessary.
Great, another Hamiltonian anti-Populist. *rolls eyes*
Not sure how good that is, Jack, then someone could potentially just buy the congress person outright. give them all the money they can accept (or such a large %).
Also, It wouldn't prevent entities that aren't the congressperson from campaigning on his behalf. If Congressperson Dick Fuckstick cant accept any more contributions then just donate to the "Private citizens supporting Dick Fuckstick foundation" or maybe the "Concerned election society of greater Bumfuck" which is officially unaffiliated with Mr. Fuckstick but still promotes him exclusively.
Any entity that claims to be a campaigning group, PAC, super PAC or what have you would have similar limitations. So while yes you could donate to Citizens for Dick Fuckstick if Mr. Fuckstick's campaign can't accept further donations, they still have a cap as well and once that's done you'll need to go on to the next PAC.
I'm not anti-Populist, I'm realistic about our failed education system. If you put nothing but progressive analysis on television all day long with a C-SPAN tempo, your viewership will be in the dozens.
I see what you mean about the article use, but I'll counter that it's a fairly common use expression with meaning beyond the syntax of the phrase.
Any entity that claims to be a campaigning group, PAC, super PAC or what have you would have similar limitations. So while yes you could donate to Citizens for Dick Fuckstick if Mr. Fuckstick's campaign can't accept further donations, they still have a cap as well and once that's done you'll need to go on to the next PAC.
The point is that the establishment of an increasing number of PAC's allows a politician to escape the intent of the proposed limitation. I'm not saying that we don't need to change campaign financing, just that we need something more complicated that a hard limit on contributions for an individual.
edit: I also really wanted a hypothetical politician named Dick Fuckstick. It's puerile, but I like it.
I'm not anti-Populist, I'm realistic about our failed education system. If you put nothing but progressive analysis on television all day long with a C-SPAN tempo, your viewership will be in the dozens.
I see what you mean about the article use, but I'll counter that it's a fairly common use expression with meaning beyond the syntax of the phrase.
I'd never heard it phrased like that before, which was why I was picking nits.
And assuming that the masses need a collective education is anti-Populist. Great things came from the masses before the advent of a public education, so clearly the masses have some inherent intelligence. Many people who we today miss point to as examples of how things should be done (staying vague on purpose) were brought to become so iconic in a time of large illiteracy. The masses have opinions are informed by experiences, by being subject of the thing in question.
Campaign finance reform cannot occur without constitutionally limiting the first amendment. I'm not ideologically opposed to the concept, but there has to be a specific, practical plan of action such that these limitations are not an overreach.
We need Congressional term limits, public financial records, and earnest enforcement.
As long as were dreaming can we get rid of first past the post in federal elections. Also, could we get rid of geographically based districts for the house. I'd also like a pony and a blowjob robot that runs on unicorn farts and happiness.
Public education is probably the most important thing we have ever done or ever will do. We need to expand and fund it to a mighty degree.
Yes, but this isn't why.
EDIT: and to tie that back to my original point, I don't know that public education needs to be expanded and better funded because the educational system told me so, I know it because I am subject to it.
A true open primary (everyone not just based on party) could solve some of the problems with our first past the post system. An open primary where the top two or three candidates go at it in the general would go a long way. Imagine having two people from the same party in a general election fighting for the same Senate seat!!!!
A true open primary (everyone not just based on party) could solve some of the problems with our first past the post system. An open primary where the top two or three candidates go at it in the general would go a long way. Imagine having two people from the same party in a general election fighting for the same Senate seat!!!!
And then all the other side has to do is band together, much like what happened in the past two presidential elections. And what is likely going to happen with Kentucky's senate race.
California's system seems to be pretty good, the jungle primary system (I think it's called) where everyone can be in the primary and the two top people get to go onto the general election. Regardless of party. So very conservative area's might have two republicans on the ballot, but the D's will probably then vote for the more moderate one.
Education is more or less the lifeblood of progressive ideology. If you want to argue that progressive ideals aren't that important, then I guess you can discard education.
The fact is that you will always have propagandists. It's inherent to humanity that such a thing will exist. Nevermind natural predisposition to xenophobia, tribalism, superstition, etc. Education is probably the most basic component of transhumanism, which I think is pretty important.
If 'we the people' have to pay for a political party primary then that primary should be completely open. If the parties want a closed primary they should pay the cost of it 100%.
Comments
Also for local campaigns like congressman and state representatives ban out of state contributions.
Greg, I guess you'll have to educate me on my "poor choice of article use".
"All that other garbage" sells the message to the otherwise disinterested public, which like it or not, is necessary.
I see what you mean about the article use, but I'll counter that it's a fairly common use expression with meaning beyond the syntax of the phrase.
edit: I also really wanted a hypothetical politician named Dick Fuckstick. It's puerile, but I like it.
Notice most of the people really causing trouble are not the old timers..
And assuming that the masses need a collective education is anti-Populist. Great things came from the masses before the advent of a public education, so clearly the masses have some inherent intelligence. Many people who we today miss point to as examples of how things should be done (staying vague on purpose) were brought to become so iconic in a time of large illiteracy. The masses have opinions are informed by experiences, by being subject of the thing in question.
Here is one specific idea.
http://oneway.lessig.org/post/47040632413/one-way-forward-get-it-here
Edit: Rym has a good point.
EDIT: and to tie that back to my original point, I don't know that public education needs to be expanded and better funded because the educational system told me so, I know it because I am subject to it.
The fact is that you will always have propagandists. It's inherent to humanity that such a thing will exist. Nevermind natural predisposition to xenophobia, tribalism, superstition, etc. Education is probably the most basic component of transhumanism, which I think is pretty important.