Would Citizens be better served if money was removed from the poolitical process

quote:

---

First I'd like to see money only allowed from the district/state the office represents.

---

That' what we call a loophole.

Stupid keyboard.

I do seriously think it's the only solution to getting rid of outside influences. I do not feel governments( state, local, federal) work for us. It's more for interests.

quote:

---

I do seriously think it's the only solution to getting rid of outside influences.

---

I agree with you. It is supposed to be a marketplace of ideas, not a battle of the pocketbooks.

I'd actually go for this sooner than term limits if I had to pick.

quote:

---

First I'd like to see money only allowed from the district/state the office represents.

I don't need some PAC in California trying to eff up the races here in SC.

---

Agreed. But they would just find ways to get creative with laundering.

Democrats would end up winning a seat in a district with a net income of $300M after somehow magically securing $100M in "contributions" from that area.

Of course….citizenry would also be MUCH better served if corporations weren’t allowed to donate, and private donations were capped

Yes.

quote:

---

First I'd like to see money only allowed from the district/state the office represents.

I don't need some PAC in California trying to eff up the races here in SC.

---

I've thought this is the way it ought to be for some time now. The problem resides in the fact that both major political parties want to consolidate their power in DC, so we'll never see anything from congress addressing this issue.

I think the way to handle is is for your state of South Carolina, or my state of Georgia, for instance, to pass legislation making it illegal for any candidate for office to receive funding of any kind from outside their district. That means on municipal, county, district, and state level. And, considering that US congressmen and senators are elected to represent their respective districts or the state as a whole, no out of state moneys can be provided for their campaigns.

Candidates receiving such funding will be considered disqualified from that election and removed from the ballot, and those sending out-of-state funding to that candidate shall be charged with election interference or tampering.

That might go at least a little way toward restoring some semblance of sovereignty for the states as was intended from the beginning.

quote:

---

First I'd like to see money only allowed from the district/state the office represents.

---

My dad said the same thing probably 40 years ago. It will never happen. It would create unequal opportunities from profiting from corruption.