In the wake of last week's Supreme Court decision, I think it is time to think creatively about campaign finance reform. While I am all for a constitutional amendment, there is no question that is a long and difficult road to travel.
Instead I think that advocates of campaign finance reform should try a different approach.
A friend suggested it to me several years ago and I dismissed it at the time. Circumstances have obviously changed however with corporations now allowed unlimited advertising. And, a court ruling in favor of unlimited corporate donations is not out of the question.
So . . . why not allow unlimited donations with only one restriction. All donations would be anonymous. An agency can be set up to mechanically process the donations and report to all candidates every quarter how much money they have to spend. This should pass Supreme Court muster since there is no way in which in inhibits free speech.
Why wouldn't a donor tell a candidate that they were donating $X million to that candidate? Nothing would stop them. But there would be no reason for the candidate to believe the potential donor either since they could tell the candidate's opponent the same thing. Congresspeople would have less incentive to shake down potential donors and travel the fund raising circuit.
Yes, there are certainly practical challenges and monitors for corruption at the agency charged with handling donations would have to be stringent. However if everyone is going to be allowed to donate whatever they want anyway, why not try a different kind of restriction?