HB 110: Relating to limits on political contributions and direct campaign expenditures by individuals.
From QR we learn that a bipartisan group of legislators banded together today to put a $100,000 cap on contributions in 2 year cycles. A quote from Casteel:
She asked her party to pay as much attention to transparency in campaign donations as it does to transparency in the operation of public schools.
The call for this session is tighter than Linda Harper Brown's pantsuit so it'll be hard to get this passed, but I applaud everyone involved for trying.
Maybe a better idea would be to require 48 hr reporting of any receipt, in-kind, promise, or loan over $1,000...just a thought. In addition to all the other reporting requirements.
Forgive, but since when does any of this really matter? Would any contribution and favorable vote in return be that big of a surprise? And even if it was a surprise - would it really matter in the end? (I'm hoping someone says yes and shares a tiny ray of hope)
Like what if you found out so and so took money from say - tobacco - exxon - or those poor insurance companies - or their front groups - and then voted to help them a whole lot? wow, then where would we be?
RSS
I really have to disagree, PD. You can limit the funds that politicians can accept, but you have to be much more circumspect about how you limit money that people spend, because of the First Amendment. In the end, you sideline the political parties and give power to folks like Bob Perry and George Soros. As wacky as the parties are, they're not nearly as wacky as many contributors.
Look at McCain-Feingold and the 2004 elections. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and Americans Coming Together really didn't do much for the debate.