• Narauko@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    29 days ago

    Yes. All money needs to be removed from politics with the same amount given to all candidates to run with and dark money investigated and prosecuted. Politicians shouldn’t be NASCAR teams, and lobbying should be called what it actually is.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      29 days ago

      I agree. The irony is that we’re going to need money and resources to do that. I would rather it wasn’t from oligarchs. The question is then who from. Democrats have “technically” broken fundraising records repeatedly with small donors. Every 4 years. Which is a tiny meaningless record. Republicans and conservatives spend MULTIPLES of that 4 year aggregate EVERY YEAR. On campaigning and messaging.

      It was recently revealed that many conservative media personalities and influencers . People like Tim Poole were being paid millions of dollars a year. To put out one barely edited propaganda video a week. To put that in perspective, over the course of two weeks. With 1/5th the effort of a left leaning media personality like Sam Cedar. They make more than he does in a year. In just two weeks. This isn’t isolated either. A big group were found to be unregistered foreign agents of Russia because of this. And Russia didn’t invent it. Our own oligarchs have been patronizing conservative media outlets and influencers like this for decades.

      How do we compete with that? Serious question.

      • Narauko@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        28 days ago

        Strict campaign finance laws, where all political donations go to a bipartisan elections department and then are split equally between all candidates in graduated stages from the primaries through until the general election. No contributions to candidates directly, no PACs or Super PACs (they can exist but fund everyone equally), no ads paid for outside the provided war chest. Any dark money found results in IRS forensic audits and criminal penalties for the campaigns.

        If you want more money for your “side”, you get it at roughly 50% of what you put in. The “other side” gets the other half. Should still drive donations, including mega-doners, because their candidate still gets more money for ads and campaigning. This also allows 3rd party candidates to compete equally at all stages. If we can get graduated polling too this should spur a further plurality of viable candidates.

        Political commentary from news and independent “journalism” on places like YouTube would still be covered under free speech, but audits are allowed to look into them being dark money ads with the above consequences for the campaigns.

        Foreign ads are what they are unfortunately, but the IRS is good at finding US money laundering through offshore institutions. Make sending money to foreign assets to be spent circumventing these laws especially steep. A few campaign managers and money managers getting 20-life or going to Gitmo for laundering campaign money through Russian agents should help curb some shenanigans.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          28 days ago

          Sounds great. How do we get there? Campaign finance laws are written and voted on by politicians. Why would a politician funded by oligarchs cut off their own funding?

          If you want campaign finance reform, you need politicians in office who are willing to vote for it. Which means you need to get them into office. Which means their campaigns need funding.

          That means we need a plan to fund campaigns in the current landscape, before reform.

          • Narauko@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            28 days ago

            Honestly? I won’t hold my breath, because the only thing that gets unanimous bipartisan support is congressional raises. I doubt we will see any of my suggestions or any campaign finance reform in my lifetime. We can’t even get a majority of elected Democrats to agree that insider trading by Congress should be illegal.

            Realistically it’s probably a lost cause, but I will vote for, and campaign for, anyone running with that on their platform. Not supporting ranked choice voting is one of the many, many reasons I voted Democrat and not for my district’s Republican candidate, but that was a substantial issue I looked for in every candidate on my ballot.

            • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              28 days ago

              I consider myself, broadly, a pragmatist. Lost causes are lost effort in a world that desperately needs unwasted effort applied strategically. As idealistic as it may seem, politics is a game of pragmatism. All that actually matters is installing representatives that represent your interests. At least, moreso than the popular alternative.