This way, unfathomable millions wouldn't be wasted on their self indulging parades and keep their campaigns tiny.
Let's face it, politicians just like celebrities, need to be taken down a peg or two. There has been way too much idolatry.
Then people like AOC can't get donations from fans around the country.
Frankly, our founding fathers never envisioned a population so lazy and stupid as to put up with the type of campaign finance bullshit that we see.
Everyone bitches about Congress, yet 90+% win re-election every time.
It says something more about us, than them, if you ask me.......
Right, this is it when push comes to shove. Founders got it right about keeping government out of our business, envisioned a Republic, where whoever was President, the Senate, the House at the federal level would not be of any major consequence. We gave that up long ago. Next great leap is to develop a system that keeps government out, and stupid lazy people from having a say in our lives.
It's a conundrum, that is for sure. But remember, at the beginning of the Republic, not all men could vote; just those that had skin in the game.
We lost the Republic with each new group added that didn't have much of a horse in the race, or who were too stupid to PICK a horse in the race, even if they had none in it.
It's a problem, that's for sure.
Its a harsh thing to admit, but I can't argue with you, you are right. It only stands to reason that the have nots will eventually rob the treasury paid for by the haves. I am not talking haves as in just rich people, just people who pay taxes, not the ones that receive more than they pay in.
That's it. They will take from the next BUM even that has a better cardboard box than them, if they could.
We are the tax mules, and they are the ones that are getting the free ride.......
Well put
I'd love to see lobying abolished.
So assume I know nothing (it's true), how would you define lobbying, to the point where there would be no negative consequences (ie politicians would legally have to ignore public requests).
Make it utterly transparent. It would have to be done in a public session. Its not the be all end all, people wouldn't show up because they are lazy, but at least the machinery would be in place. Most of this responsibility comes down to us.
Like all lobbyists removed from DC.
Made illegal.
So that the District representatives have to listen to their constituents...from their district...that they're supposed to represent.
I really don't know what a lobbyist is. I don't think we have them in my country (I'm not American), or I just never paid attention to it in the news
Legalized corruption.
Search engines have more thorough descriptions.
Yes. By heart I am a libertarian and would lean to being against, however, things have to be the way they are some time for a reason. The libertarian approach of course is people and companies can donate to whoever they want for whatever they want. But then we get this, we allow unfettered $$$$$, and we get fucked out of the freedoms we actually care about.
I'm talking constitutional change, it's meant to be for the betterment of the next century of the country, right. It's long term thinking that you want to ensure the politicians keep in line with a better way.
Because they never break the Constitution. Lol.
Yes, absolutely. No out of area or Corp or PAC.
It should be the only way.