[Vision2020] How to Limit Lobbyist Influence

[Ron Force]

Unfortunately, Donovan, there are a couple of problems with this idea.

1. There are no limits on spending in a congressional campaign. If it should pass somehow, I'm sure the Supreme Court would find it suspect. After all, money = political speech, and (money) speech should be unfettered.


2. This year, the Roberts (Supreme) Court struck down an Arizona law that did exactly what you were suggesting: upping the public contribution to candidates who were outspent by their opponents. The court held that it unconstitutionally limited the free (spending) speech rights of the candidate with more money.

 
Ron Force
Moscow Idaho USA


________________________________
From: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
To: "vision2020 at moscow.com" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 2, 2011 6:27 PM
Subject: [Vision2020] How to Limit Lobbyist Influence


How to Limit Lobbyist Influence
 
There is a simple way to limit the influence of lobbyists on our elected office holders. Give their leading opponents two-for-one matching public dollars that go over the preset limits. 
 
For example, if a US Senate campaign is limited to $50 million and a candidate raises $60 million, $10 million over the limit, his opponent would get $20 million. No candidate would be willing to go over the limit because they would be aiding their opponent more than they would their own campaign, thus costing the taxpayer nothing. 
 
With politicians unwilling to accept more donations, the power of lobbyists would be significantly diminished. Further regulations could also be added to ensure greater influence of the people and less on special interest groups;
 
A limit of 50% of total donations could be from corporations. 
 
50% of donations must come from individuals inside their districts. 
 
No more than 10% can come from one source including their own wealth and family. 
 
75% of all donations must be from their district, neighboring districts or state. 
 
No more than 5% of donations could come from foreign sources. Foreign sources would include businesses owned by more than 50% by non-US Citizens, or businesses who have the majority of their employees overseas. 
 
The Supreme Court may have made it illegal to limit how much a person, business, or organization can donate, citing a violation of freedom of speech. However, the courts cannot compel a candidate to accept donations. Nor can the court tell the taxpayer that they cannot award candidates sums of their money for reasons they deem appropriate, it is their money. 
 
Lobbyists would still have influence, but it would never be more than 50% of the Congressional concern. And no one person, business, or special interest would control more than 10% of a candidate. The primary role of the lobbyist would be doing what they claim they are great at, giving members of Congress information to make informed decisions, but without the piles of cash next to the information. 
 
Donovan Arnold
BS, Political Science, University of Idaho
 
 
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
              http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20111002/e6c80207/attachment.html>