Campaign Finance Reform

[tallslenderguy]

This has become an important topic to me, and i think it's a central piece to the puzzle of managing the democratic process.  

 

[evilcoyote]

Sadly, I don't think it will ever happen. I agree it needs to happen though.

[tallslenderguy]

12 hours ago, evilcoyote said:

Sadly, I don't think it will ever happen. I agree it needs to happen though.

No doubt it's a big challenge.  

i think it comes down to lots of money vs  lots of people.  i believe one of the biggest reasons our country has gotten to where it is is because 'we the people' have been (largely) disengaged.  i believe i have been. Not completely, i vote every election, but i now believe that is not enough.  Individually, i've written government representatives... and discovered the only ones who will even receive correspondence are the ones in your voting district. i've also sought out groups to belong to that have common concerns to join my voice with them.

Ultimately, i think we can make this happen but it will take a united effort.  i'm beginning to believe that we have a lot more that unites the majority of us in this country than divides us.  There are definitely powers at work that want to see us divided. It's part of modern warfare for countries like China and Russian to use the algorithm and social media to purposely divide Americans and cause chaos, but both democrat and republican parties also engage in continuous divisive rhetoric.  

A fact that keeps haunting and energizing me is that, frequently, only two thirds of those qualified to vote in America.  But i don't believe voting is enough, that we have to stay involved, and do stuff like voice our views and hold our representatives accountable.  

Here's a link from Pew Research on where Americans land on the political spectrum, with an excerpt on those who land in the "political middle:" 

"Is there a ‘middle’ in politics today?Surveys by Pew Research Center and other national polling organizations have found broad support, in principle, for a third major political party. Yet the typology study finds that the three groups with the largest shares of self-identified independents (most of whom lean toward a party) – Stressed Sideliners, Outsider Left and Ambivalent Right – have very little in common politically. Stressed Sideliners hold mixed views; Ambivalent Right are conservative on many economic issues, while moderate on some social issues; and Outsider Left are very liberal on most issues, especially on race and the social safety net. What these groups do have in common is relatively low interest in politics: They had the lowest rates of voting in the 2020 presidential election and are less likely than other groups to follow government and public affairs most of the time."

[think before following links] https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/11/09/beyond-red-vs-blue-the-political-typology/

[evilcoyote]

1 hour ago, tallslenderguy said:

No doubt it's a big challenge.  

i think it comes down to lots of money vs  lots of people.  i believe one of the biggest reasons our country has gotten to where it is is because 'we the people' have been (largely) disengaged.  i believe i have been. Not completely, i vote every election, but i now believe that is not enough.  Individually, i've written government representatives... and discovered the only ones who will even receive correspondence are the ones in your voting district. i've also sought out groups to belong to that have common concerns to join my voice with them.

Ultimately, i think we can make this happen but it will take a united effort.  i'm beginning to believe that we have a lot more that unites the majority of us in this country than divides us.  There are definitely powers at work that want to see us divided. It's part of modern warfare for countries like China and Russian to use the algorithm and social media to purposely divide Americans and cause chaos, but both democrat and republican parties also engage in continuous divisive rhetoric.  

A fact that keeps haunting and energizing me is that, frequently, only two thirds of those qualified to vote in America.  But i don't believe voting is enough, that we have to stay involved, and do stuff like voice our views and hold our representatives accountable.  

Here's a link from Pew Research on where Americans land on the political spectrum, with an excerpt on those who land in the "political middle:" 

"Is there a ‘middle’ in politics today?Surveys by Pew Research Center and other national polling organizations have found broad support, in principle, for a third major political party. Yet the typology study finds that the three groups with the largest shares of self-identified independents (most of whom lean toward a party) – Stressed Sideliners, Outsider Left and Ambivalent Right – have very little in common politically. Stressed Sideliners hold mixed views; Ambivalent Right are conservative on many economic issues, while moderate on some social issues; and Outsider Left are very liberal on most issues, especially on race and the social safety net. What these groups do have in common is relatively low interest in politics: They had the lowest rates of voting in the 2020 presidential election and are less likely than other groups to follow government and public affairs most of the time."

[think before following links] [think before following links] https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/11/09/beyond-red-vs-blue-the-political-typology/

Oh, I absolutely agree with you that it could be changed and getting people to vote isn't the only answer.

[hntnhole]

4 hours ago, tallslenderguy said:

i'm beginning to believe that we have a lot more that unites the majority of us in this country than divides us.  

I've long-thought that:  well before the current daily outrages emanating from the White House.  The divisions are really all about the usual things that have divided communities/nations since proto-humans crawled out of the swamps.  In the current case though, the hatemongering has come to a point that murdering citizens in the streets - regardless of those citizens agendas - has somehow become acceptable to certain ill-educated, irresponsible non-achievers, trying to compensate for their failures with harrumphing, beating, of their empty chests and vacant minds, even to the depths of murdering citizens in cold blood.  As you know, a fever will eventually "break", and we're witnessing the fever of stupidity, dullness, utterly false pride, personal failure, all come to a head; just like a festering pimple.   

These folks really don't matter a hill of beans in the long-run, despite their anti-human outrages in the short-run.  They have made the conscious choice to follow a time-worn path of hatreds, and that never ever ever ends well.  Notably, the "mouthpieces" have begun to fall;  Noem is on the way out, HaHa Homan will be next, and when these Ice dullards have finally melted away, we'll be able to start putting things aright again.  

Your quote above belies an optimist peeking through the shadows - welcome to the dawning New Day.   

[PozBearWI]

Things are definitely a mess still.  But it's interesting as it won't take very many R's switching to I to dramatically shift the prevailing political winds.  

[tobetrained]

8 hours ago, tallslenderguy said:

i think it comes down to lots of money vs  lots of people.  i believe one of the biggest reasons our country has gotten to where it is is because 'we the people' have been (largely) disengaged.

Can you explain your meaning here? voter turn-out rates, over recent elections, are much higher than they've been in decades. Same with the number of people who make political donations and volunteer for  both campaigns and non-election political groups. In fact, a large part as to why representatives require your address, which you mentioned above, is due to the volume of people calling, emailing, etc. to voice their support/concern on legislation -- mainly from those aligned to political action groups (e.g., pro-life/choice groups, etc.).

But to the issue of campaign finance, I didn't really hear from the video an understanding of money in politics/public interest.

Special interest groups, let's say "for environmentalism" or "for religious freedom" can collect and spend any amount from any person at any time, even during an election window....as long as they don't reference a candidate. If you limit the campaigns, they are playing an uphill battle against these groups.

The video also missed on the timing. There wasn't "mass media" until TV began to hit its prime in the mid-60s, both for immediacy of media itself but also for the advertising. That, in turn, was the driver of reform in the 70s, in response to that new consumer touch-point. And the reform is due my prior point -- campaigns needed the ability to battle not just their electoral opponent but also the messaging "out there" on politically-related topics (blocking those is the free speech issue). 

In today's digital/social world, it's more immediate and more personalized....and more fractional-ized! 

[tallslenderguy]

 

3 hours ago, tobetrained said:

Can you explain your meaning here? voter turn-out rates, over recent elections, are much higher than they've been in decades. Same with the number of people who make political donations and volunteer for  both campaigns and non-election political groups.

my point is not whether more Americans voted in recent elections than in past (though apparently 2024 was 1.5% less than 2020).  my point is the "more than half" that did not vote. 

"According to the Census Bureau, 65.3% of US citizens voted in the 2024 election, the third-highest turnout in the past 34 years. Turnout increased by 13.1 percentage points since the most recent mid-term elections in 2022, but decreased by 1.5 percentage points since the 2020 presidential election."

"Over half of the adult population did not vote in 2024 because they were either not interested (19.7%), too busy (17.8%), or did not like the candidates or campaign issues (14.7%). Not being interested was also the top reason for not voting in 2020."

[think before following links] https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-americans-voted-in-2024/

my point re money is simple, the majority giving little or nothing doesn't have the same potential influence as the individual giving 5 million or the super pac. Would Musk have gotten the DOGE position of power had he not contributed $132 million?  [think before following links] https://247wallst.com/politics/2025/02/13/who-funds-americas-biggest-political-campaigns/ 

"Super PACs supporting Harris or Trump raised more than twice as much from donors giving at least $5 million compared to the last election."

"Wealthy donors giving at least $5 million to support a presidential candidate are spending more than twice as much as they did in 2020. That’s according to our new analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission looking at super PACs that are devoted to supporting Kamala Harris or Donald Trump. Most of that increase is attributable to the effort to elect Trump, who has outsourced much of his campaign to affiliated super PACs that have raised almost three times the amount from $5 million-plus donors relative to those boosting his last campaign.

Both parties have increased their reliance on $5 million-plus donors, but not to the same degree. Super PACs backing Harris raised about 50 percent more from these donors than those supporting Joe Biden had by this time in 2020. Most of the growth comes from the pro-Trump camp, where donors of $5 million or more in 2024 gave $522 million, almost three times the $180 million they provided in 2020. This is a complete reversal from Trump’s first run in 2016, when he relied largely on small donors and had relatively little big money support. This year, supportive big-money super PACs are outspending the Trump campaign itself.

The vast majority of money given in donations of $5 million and up comes from individual donors, but some donors to the super PACs are groups that have raised money from others. That includes, most prominently, dark money nonprofits that do not disclose their donors, as well as corporations and unions. Although some of the original contributors of this money no doubt gave less than $5 million, we include the amounts here because the money was pooled and leveraged for political use by the groups’ leaders. Judging by occasional revelations of donations, it’s likely that large dark money groups rely heavily on megadonors."

[think before following links] https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/megadonors-playing-larger-role-presidential-race-fec-data-shows

 

 

[Hungryforbbc]

It’s the only way we’re ever going to get out of this corrupt two party capitalist system. Take the money out of politics and make every election publicly funded. The sociopaths who get into government looking for a financial come up will turn to private sector jobs instead and we’ll be left with people who legitimately want to make things better for everyone rather than just themselves and their kind.