Skip to main content

View Diary: How To Win: Raising money for populist candidates (59 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Hugh - I don't know what the campaign finance (0+ / 0-)

    laws are in Illinois, and some states do allow corporate contributions to candidates, but corporations have been prohibited from making contributions to candidates for federal office since 1907 (The Tillman Act). When you state that President Obama had to solicit contributions from companies when he started his political career, is that because they are legal contributions in IL?

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Fri Jul 12, 2013 at 08:24:24 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Candidate Obama and corporations (0+ / 0-)

      Candidate Obama most certainly met with representatives of large business concerns and corporations.  To suggest there has never been any communication between the candidate and business interests is absurd.

      Of course, neither the candidate nor the business interests are willing to reveal publicly what was said or transacted at these meetings.

      I suppose it is possible that candidate Obama has always been a corporatist - a supporter and backer of policies that increase the wealth and power of the corporations - and therefore never needed any encouragement from the corporations to support their favorite policies.

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri Jul 12, 2013 at 09:50:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hugh - I didn't in any way suggest that candidate (0+ / 0-)

        Obama, for the state Senate, the US Senate, or the POTUS never met with companies. I just wanted to ask if he was soliciting contributions not from the employees of companies but from the corporate treasury of those companies? Your comment implied that he was seeking direct contributions from companies, which may be legal for state office in IL.  

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Fri Jul 12, 2013 at 09:55:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Candidates and corporations communicate (0+ / 0-)

          What I am suggesting is that candidates for (and holders of) public office and corporations communicate for mutual benefit.  The candidate wants support (both direct financial support and indirect support), and the corporations want laws that favor the corporation.

          "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

          by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri Jul 12, 2013 at 10:17:20 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hugh - I certainly agree that corporations and (0+ / 0-)

            candidates/office holders communicate for mutual benefit. But for federal elections, and in most states, corporations cannot provide "direct financial support". That's my point.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Fri Jul 12, 2013 at 10:57:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Many kinds of support (0+ / 0-)

              Direct financial support is one of many different ways that corporations and wealthy interests influence the outcome of elections, AND the running of the country.

              I and others have suggested, that ALL funding for campaigns come from public money, and that ALL private gifts to campaigners be made illegal.  This would prevent many (tho' not all) of the ways private fortunes influence elections and the writing and passing of legislation.

              "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

              by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri Jul 12, 2013 at 11:03:28 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Hugh - I don't think that would be constitutional (0+ / 0-)

                Unless you were able to overturn Buckley v Valeo (money = speech) I don't think a law making campaign contributions illegal would ever be constitutional. I think you could have public financing at a level to make most candidates not seek outside financing, but you couldn't prohibit them. Plus limiting personal spending by candidates and outside independent expenditures, is constitutionally difficult.

                I think there is a big risk that the SCOTUS will strike down the current per person limits directly to campaigns. The limits haven't changed in decades, while the cost of campaigns has exploded. If Congress was smart they would raise the per person limits before someone takes a case to the SCOTUS. There may even be a case working its way through the federal courts on this issue already.  

                "let's talk about that"

                by VClib on Fri Jul 12, 2013 at 11:19:54 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Therein lies the debate (0+ / 0-)

                  You are correct that some people would say it is not constitutional to make a law to prohibit private fiancial gifts to office-holders.

                  But then again, most proposed laws will have some groups saying the law is not constitutional.

                  The fact that some people saying a law prohibiting the giving of private financial gifts is unconstitutional does not bother me too much.  Because what is the alternative?  Continuance of the status quo, whereby the corporations and wealthy interests choose the legislators and writes the laws, is not in my opinion in the bests interests of the country as a whole.

                  Can you suggest a better way to change the current system by which the wealthy and corporations run the country?

                  "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

                  by Hugh Jim Bissell on Fri Jul 12, 2013 at 11:41:12 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  Obama (0+ / 0-)

        Was involved in privatizing the energy company in Ill. He has always been a neoliberal.

        Union busting???? That's disgusting!!!

        by invisiblewoman on Fri Jul 12, 2013 at 01:10:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site