5 ms·
I agree that the feedback loop between corporations who contribute to political campaigns with money and politicians that can regulate/deregulate and who need m
by HotKFreshSwag 15y ago
I agree that the feedback loop between corporations who contribute to political campaigns with money and politicians that can regulate/deregulate and who need money to run their campaigns to get (re)elected is corrupting. They are extorting each other for money and regulatory influence. This does not mean that rich corporations, regulation or money in political campaigns are inherently corrupting.
It just means that the way it works need to be adjusted.
"For example, to borrow an idea from Yale’s Bruce Ackerman and Ian Ayres, if elections were funded by what we could call “democracy vouchers,” where citizens could allocate up to $50 to any candidate and candidates could receive money only from citizens in their districts, then a dependency upon voters might well be the same as, or close enough to, a dependency upon contributors."
http://bostonreview.net/BR35.5/lessig.php http://bostonreview.net/BR35.5/lessig.php
- jacques_chester 15y agoHow is this different from public election funding? In Australia political parties receive several dollars per vote over a minimum threshold. It doesn't seem to improve their behaviour all that much.
- eftpotrm 15y agoIf we're to argue that citizens could allocate up to $50 spread between candidates in any election in which they are eligible to vote, and that shall be the only permitted funding, what's the point in having votes at all; have we not just defined a preferential voting system?