Yes, the court has gutted almost every limit on what big donors can spend, because campaign cash supposedly is a form of free speech.
For this reason, the only path to game changing reform - short of amending the Constitution - is a public financing system that creates an alternative pool of money candidates can use without selling out to special interests.
Of the public financing mechanisms, Voter Dollars is best because it gives every voter the power that comes with campaign cash.
Then he's going to want special interest groups to not independently spend, so AARP, NRA, unions - all the people that were on the Citizens United side - get shut out of the political process. Hmm, what does that leave?
SCOTUS could be relevant in several ways. How do you mean?
Numerous rulings on campaign contributions and this has been tested in the Supreme Court over and over.
Yes, the court has gutted almost every limit on what big donors can spend, because campaign cash supposedly is a form of free speech.
For this reason, the only path to game changing reform - short of amending the Constitution - is a public financing system that creates an alternative pool of money candidates can use without selling out to special interests.
Of the public financing mechanisms, Voter Dollars is best because it gives every voter the power that comes with campaign cash.
www.savedemocracyinamerica.org
So hire some lawyers and bring a case, pretty simple, right? I assume you would ban unions from donating and other similar groups, right?
Then he's going to want special interest groups to not independently spend, so AARP, NRA, unions - all the people that were on the Citizens United side - get shut out of the political process. Hmm, what does that leave?