Seeing as the 2012 election is coming up in the next 6 months, I feel that I should start discussion on one of the most important things in politics. How the candidates get there money. Currently, there are limits in the United States as to how much a person or a business is allowed to donate directly to a candidate. However, we also have these wonderful things called Super PACs. These are capable of rasing unlimited money from people, who then are allowed to spend it in favor of a candidate. My question to the AG community is thus: Does America need more stingent campaign finance laws, or should we allow things to stay the same as they are now?
t what the usa need is a max amount of money allowed to promote the candidates. and when they go over the amount. the party has to choose a new guy and start over again whit promoting the new guy.
if you don't set the money waaayyyy to high, there might be a chanch a 3rd or even more partys will be able to go for president. allowing more different views then just 2 in your congress. so it becomes able to get more closer to the citizens. today it's to much black and white. your country needs to develop a grey area.
btw i suggest to say, this is about the usa and not any of the other 30 countrys that have a election this year.
btw i suggest to say, this is about the usa and not any of the other 30 countrys that have a election this year.
Yeah, that's why I said:
Does America need more stingent campaign finance laws, or should we allow things to stay the same as they are now?
For the record, I feel that we need spending caps set at around $20/10 million, or whatever would be appropriate, as long as it allows for more than 2 parties to run.
A call of Duty Commentator talked about some news he heard where apparently all campaign contributions would have to be reported to the government. I was going to do some more research on this, but I never actually got around to it.
Basically, I see no need for there to be a donation limit. There are numerous ways in which corporations can bribe politicians without them donating to the politician directly. The solution is not to put a cap on donations, but rather, we should limit the government's power to create unfair, corporatist, bills.
Currently, there are limits in the United States as to how much a person or a business is allowed to donate directly to a candidate. However, we also have these wonderful things called Super PACs. These are capable of rasing unlimited money from people, who then are allowed to spend it in favor of a candidate.
I thought they killed that limit so that the most corrupted candidate can raise as money as they want in order to bury the opponent with false ads and lies.
Why should there be more stringent laws, especially that which limits the amount of funds politicians can receive? If people want to donate, they should be allowed to. They should be allowed to show their support for whatever quack they want to, provided the accounting and financial check book balancing is sound.
limits the amount of funds politicians can receive? If people want to donate, they should be allowed to.
my point was not about the receiving part but the spending part. the party's have to show how much they spend and on what they spend it. the amount of promotions costs should have a limit during the election period. all the rest doesn't. so a plane ticket would not be counted in these costs because it is a travel cost not a promotion cost. but a add on tv or flyers or whatever they can think of that they use to promote the guy will count.
I thought they killed that limit so that the most corrupted candidate can raise as money as they want in order to bury the opponent with false ads and lies.
the candidate they use for these add's would have to agree that they make this add for him. when he does he has to add the costs for it (even if they didn't pay it themself, it's still promotion of him) to the total amount. if they don't agree (most likely) then it has to be illegal to put them on tv during the election period.
