Giving politicians money is a good idea, when you can be reasonable sure it’ll be beneficial to you or society. Money is needed for elections, and if you don’t give the rich will win all of them even more so
Elections shouldn’t NEED money. They are operated by the government and there is a public option. What elections NEED is less money, specifically no corporate or super pac money laundering.
They’ll always need money as long as money remains a concept. You still need to do outreach, and that isn’t free no matter what it ideally should be.
Allowing small person money with a low limit would be the best way to go about it(within the constraints of our current economic system) in my opinion, with banning higher sums.
Giving politicians money is a good idea, when you can be reasonable sure it’ll be beneficial to you or society. Money is needed for elections, and if you don’t give the rich will win all of them even more so
Elections shouldn’t NEED money. They are operated by the government and there is a public option. What elections NEED is less money, specifically no corporate or super pac money laundering.
Public funding of all elections would solve SO MANY problems in the US!
Just think, no more negative ads and no more money = speech.
All the candidates get the same funding and they have to use it wisely.
The ONLY other “advertising” allowed is individuals and groups saying I endorse “whoever” and that’s it.
They’ll always need money as long as money remains a concept. You still need to do outreach, and that isn’t free no matter what it ideally should be.
Allowing small person money with a low limit would be the best way to go about it(within the constraints of our current economic system) in my opinion, with banning higher sums.