Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics

[Lesh]

She's just pissing up a rope.

Money is always in politics. Anyone who doesn't believe that is dumber than a box of rocks.

In fact, the box of rocks is smarter than they are.

And money will remain so as long as people like you support it

 

[evenflow1969]

Got to admit. I don't hate Pocahontas' bill. I am sure she put something in there to fuck it up, but it is not obvious.

Something a partisan hack would say....

Just admit a bill like this would have never ever been conceived by a republican.....

You just got a reach across the isle. A tepid reach but a reach none the less. Do not smack the hand away. Instead maybe invite him to read the bill through. You have to admit that is about as close to across the isle they get these days. Instead maybe try and coex him across a little better and maybe politics can become less insane. There are republicans that would support this, they just do not have the balls to say it out loud yet.

 

[Olde Europe]

I don't care about 'judicial muster'. America can pass any law she wants if enough people want it.

My bad. I didn't realize you are merely fantasizing.

I said/inferred/thought nothing of the sort.

You have a knack for putting words in people's mouths...a sure sign of a lack of intelligence and/or experience.

I am just saying that 'well Duh' it would be hard to pass. But if enough people want it - it will.


And you completely ducked my questions to you...(typical with online trolls - which you seem to be) I shall try again...

How can you donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign if it is illegal to donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign?

BTW - instead of whining what won't work (which anyone can do), why not contribute a suggestion that you think might work/help.


Let's see it you can get it together enough to answer either coherently or intelligently. My guess is 'no'...but we will see.

You are still merely fantasizing.

Of course, in order to circumvent your regulation, you simply pay 1000 people $110 for each of them to pay $100 to any campaign you choose. Easy enough, is it?

I am, for all I hear, fine with Warren's proposed bill for the time being. I'd be also fine with a $2000 limit in campaign donations, and with every representative going to jail if found with a single corporate buck in his or her pocket. But that would be mere fantasy. I would also ban lobbyists from ever talking to lawmakers; they should be forced to make their case in a public hearing room, cameras running, so that everyone is aware as to who is lobbying for whom, and on what issue, and without a single dime changing hands.

But then, we're still fantasizing.

 

[Claudette]

She's just pissing up a rope.

Money is always in politics. Anyone who doesn't believe that is dumber than a box of rocks.

In fact, the box of rocks is smarter than they are.

And money will remain so as long as people like you support it

You sure are funny. Where in my post does it say I support it??

Nowhere. Carry on dumbass.

 

[Lesh]

Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

Several things here.

Of course, Warren't bill will not eliminate all corrupt behavior. Which bill could? That is to say, the argument that a bill is not worth enacting unless 100% successful is invalid.

Moreover, the same applies to your other argument: If you eliminate the simpler, more easily detectable classes of corruption, that leaves the more secretive forms requiring more criminal energy, that is, forcing "corruption farther underground". So, BTW, does your own proposal. That still doesn't mean the simpler forms shouldn't be penalized. Rather, you start with them, and amend legislation to go after the more egregious cases as they occur.

Finally, for your proposal to pass juridical muster, you first need to get rid of a Supreme Court that defines Money spent on campaigns as "speech", and corporations as "persons", involving First Amendment protections. Otherwise, that won't work.

That said, whoever thinks anything related to government ethics that might actually work will pass while McConnell has a say on which bill gets to the Senate floor, hasn't been paying attention.

So you're saying that to deal with corruption we first have to have a Dem Senate where McConnell can't warp the system in this way.

I completely agree

 

[martybegan]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

How about removing the ability of government worker unions to influence politics?

 

[Crepitus]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

I'm all for it but it will never pass, and even if it does it won't work as you noted.

 

[Meathead]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

POCAHONTAS. Be brave, then; for your captain is brave, and vows reformation. There shall be in England seven half-penny loaves sold for a penny: the three-hoop'd pot shall have ten hoops; and I will make it felony to drink small beer: all the realm shall be in common; and in Cheapside shall my palfrey go to grass: and when I am queen,– as queen I will be,–

ALL. God save your majesty!

POCAHONTAS. I thank you, good people:– there shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score; and I will apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.

DICK. The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.

 

[McRocket]

I don't care about 'judicial muster'. America can pass any law she wants if enough people want it.

My bad. I didn't realize you are merely fantasizing.

I said/inferred/thought nothing of the sort.

You have a knack for putting words in people's mouths...a sure sign of a lack of intelligence and/or experience.

I am just saying that 'well Duh' it would be hard to pass. But if enough people want it - it will.


And you completely ducked my questions to you...(typical with online trolls - which you seem to be) I shall try again...

How can you donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign if it is illegal to donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign?

BTW - instead of whining what won't work (which anyone can do), why not contribute a suggestion that you think might work/help.


Let's see it you can get it together enough to answer either coherently or intelligently. My guess is 'no'...but we will see.

You are still merely fantasizing.

Of course, in order to circumvent your regulation, you simply pay 1000 people $110 for each of them to pay $100 to any campaign you choose. Easy enough, is it?

I am, for all I hear, fine with Warren's proposed bill for the time being. I'd be also fine with a $2000 limit in campaign donations, and with every representative going to jail if found with a single corporate buck in his or her pocket. But that would be mere fantasy. I would also ban lobbyists from ever talking to lawmakers; they should be forced to make their case in a public hearing room, cameras running, so that everyone is aware as to who is lobbying for whom, and on what issue, and without a single dime changing hands.

But then, we're still fantasizing.

Won't work.

Number one rule when committing a crime - have as few people in on it as possible.

If some corporation/lobbyist gives $110 to 1000 people to give $100 to a candidate? There is NO WAY that every, single on of those 1,000 people are ALL going to keep their mouths shut. No chance.

Besides, 1,000 people won't help much...that is only $100,000. Campaigns run into hundreds of millions of dollars. You would have to get AT LEAST 100,000 people in on this just to raise $10,000,000.

Surely you are not seriously suggesting that every, single one of those 100,000 people will tell absolutely no one...all for only $10 lousy bucks?


Nope, my (unoriginal) idea will definitely help lower campaign corruption.

 

[McRocket]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

I'm all for it but it will never pass, and even if it does it won't work as you noted.

Why (would it not work)?

It would do little for overall corruption...which I think is almost impossible anyway.

But it would drastically, limit campaign corruption.

 

[Crepitus]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

I'm all for it but it will never pass, and even if it does it won't work as you noted.

Why (would it not work)?

It would do little for overall corruption...which I think is almost impossible anyway.

But it would drastically limit campaign corruption.

They would find a way to profit.

I would be happy with drastically limiting campaign corruption, including eliminating things like superPACs.

 

[McRocket]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

I'm all for it but it will never pass, and even if it does it won't work as you noted.

Why (would it not work)?

It would do little for overall corruption...which I think is almost impossible anyway.

But it would drastically limit campaign corruption.

They would find a way to profit.

I would be happy with drastically limiting campaign corruption, including eliminating things like superPACs.

I don't think they would...not to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars (which is what they want).

Super PAC's (for a campaign) would be eliminated because donations could ONLY come through individuals.

And make the penalty for illegal, campaign contributions, automatic jail time of not less than 1-3 years.

If there is one thing wealthy people fear almost as much as the IRS - it is jail.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The bill told me all i need to know aboit it when it mentioned a clear "jab" at Trump. Tax returns? Lol. Are you kidding me? This has bill has nothing.

 

[Meathead]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

FFS, if money were that important then the Beast would be president.

 

[Olde Europe]

Won't work.

Number one rule when committing a crime - have as few people in on it as possible.

If some corporation/lobbyist gives $110 to 1000 people to give $100 to a candidate? There is NO WAY that every, single on of those 1,000 people are ALL going to keep their mouths shut. No chance.

Besides, 1,000 people won't help much...that is only $100,000. Campaigns run into hundreds of millions of dollars. You would have to get AT LEAST 100,000 people in on this just to raise $10,000,000.

Surely you are not seriously suggesting that every, single one of those 100,000 people will tell absolutely no one...all for only $10 lousy bucks?


Nope, my (unoriginal) idea will definitely help lower campaign corruption.

It would lead to campaigns starved for cash, and lead to schemes way more elaborate than my bare-bones sketch to circumvent it. That is, drive things deeper underground.

You know, there is one thing you can say for certain: The more confident you are you have all bases covered, problem solved, the bigger the surprises will be in the end. If campaign finance were as simple as you seem to believe, it would have been solved long ago. So far, every effort has gone to naught, and, if anything actually changed over the recent decade, the role of money in politics got bigger.

 

[Pilot1]

She should have put term limits in there too. The intent was to not have career politicians.

 

[Crixus]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

6 months tops and she folds.

 

[McRocket]

Won't work.

Number one rule when committing a crime - have as few people in on it as possible.

If some corporation/lobbyist gives $110 to 1000 people to give $100 to a candidate? There is NO WAY that every, single on of those 1,000 people are ALL going to keep their mouths shut. No chance.

Besides, 1,000 people won't help much...that is only $100,000. Campaigns run into hundreds of millions of dollars. You would have to get AT LEAST 100,000 people in on this just to raise $10,000,000.

Surely you are not seriously suggesting that every, single one of those 100,000 people will tell absolutely no one...all for only $10 lousy bucks?


Nope, my (unoriginal) idea will definitely help lower campaign corruption.

It would lead to campaigns starved for cash, and lead to schemes way more elaborate than my bare-bones sketch to circumvent it. That is, drive things deeper underground.

You know, there is one thing you can say for certain: The more confident you are you have all bases covered, problem solved, the bigger the surprises will be in the end. If campaign finance were as simple as you seem to believe, it would have been solved long ago. So far, every effort has gone to naught, and, if anything actually changed over the recent decade, the role of money in politics got bigger.

Starved for cash? You keep moving the goalposts. You make some ridiculous point about paying 1,000 people to vote a certain way...when it is obvious they would not be able to keep it quiet. I showed that was nonsense. Now you say they would be 'starved' for cash. What gobbledegook.
Sanders did INCREDIBLY well last time on a small campaign budget. You don't need huge campaign budgets any longer. Only idiots take TV campaign ads seriously. And most mid/young people don't give a shit about 'campaign stops'. It's all about the internet, MSM and the debates. And all are cheap/free.
And Sanders got almost all of his money from simple donations.

If only 2,000,000 people gave $100, that is more than enough money to run a winning campaign in 2020.

You are just acting like a troll. Making silly points and then pretending you did not even make them when they are proven to be nonsense. Just stirring up shit.

I have wasted enough time on you, troll.

We are done here.

Have a nice day.

 

[Olde Europe]

Starved for cash? You keep moving the goalposts. You make some ridiculous point about paying 1,000 people to vote a certain way...when it is obvious they would not be able to keep it quiet. I showed that was nonsense. Now you say they would be 'starved' for cash. What gobbledegook.
Sanders did INCREDIBLY well last time on a small campaign budget. You don't need huge campaign budgets any longer. Only idiots take TV campaign ads seriously. And most mid/young people don't give a shit about 'campaign stops'. It's all about the internet, MSM and the debates. And all are cheap/free.
And Sanders got almost all of his money from simple donations.

If only 2,000,000 people gave $100, that is more than enough money to run a winning campaign in 2020.

You are just acting like a troll. Making silly points and then pretending you did not even make them when they are proven to be nonsense. Just stirring up shit.

I have wasted enough time on you, troll.

We are done here.

Have a nice day.

Ah, but Sanders did "INCREDIBLY well" in his... general election campaign. I just seem to have missed that, for I remember his doing "INCREDIBLY well" meant he lost the primaries.

Look, in your limited view, campaign finance is simple. You regulate a limit, and all falls into place. It doesn't, and the fierce competition drives the parties' creativity in their hunt for the monetary advantage. Maybe most young folk don't care for campaign stops, but they usually don't decide elections.

You have a lot of over-confident blab, gobbledygook, with some insults on the side, but really, smarter people than the two of us have wrestled with the issue. If you read up on it, it's going to dawn on you that you patently don't understand the most minuscule portion on it. Like, say, what are the consequences if candidates, hamstrung by paltry campaign contributions, are outspent by several orders of magnitude by outside groups and their issue ads? If, in other words, political communication is nearly monopolized by moneyed special interests? Is that an outcome you (or anyone) could hope for?

Whatever.

Have a nice day yourself!