Posted on 05/30/2009 7:40:13 PM PDT by Steelers6
Do you agree with putting limits on how much money someone can donate to a state political candidate?
Yes 90.3% No 9.7%
Total votes: 289
I really believe that there should be no limits if the candidate is your representative or your Governor. I think you should be able to give money to someone who doesn't represent you but putting limits on giving to out of state candidates who aren't your representatives seems legitimate. Of course eliminating gerrymanding like Illinois does currently needs to be eliminated, being drawn into non-competitive districts is no good.
Those Illinois folks sure do like having Big Brother tell ‘em what they can and can’t do.
Must be why they live where they do.
The other reform would be only individuals can give, no unions, corporations.
what difference does it make? they can just open their registration, like obama did, and not require any ID at all and all then the entire middle east can donate.
Do you agree with putting limits on how much money someone can donate to a state political candidate?
Yes 88.8%
No 11.2%
I would also add that you should only be allowed to give to candidates you can actually vote for. Otherwise it is a bribe. For example, a congressman can only collect money from people in the district they are running in. Senators can only collect money from the state, Presidents from the country.
I voted No, I don’t think you should be limited to a set dollar amount for the people that represent you or are running to represent you.
Some other peoples reps it’s seems legitimate to limit since they are not your rep or statewide officials. Gerrymandering needs to eliminated though so we get more competive districts.
I’m tired of elected officials who’ve been bought by big donors.
That’s my position too, I think the limits should be on out of state and. Not to say you can’t donate but they shouldn’t be allowed to donate tens thousands of dollars.
Not sure how to deal if you own property or have a business in a different district than you live in.
I don’t care how much money an individual gives to a candidate, what I want to see a limit on is the TOTAL amount of money a candidate can raise for a campaign. I think 2 million total should do it. Stop the incessant ads on TV, stop the 2 years of campaigning before an election(limit on when they can start campaigning also)stop one candidate from buying the election. If you can’t get your message out in 60 days before the election and with 2 million bucks, tough.
The more the politicians put limits on what we can donate the more imbalanced the donations become. Those who have LOTS and LOTS of money and want LOTS and LOTS of power and slip money to the candidates illegally. Mean while, honest citizens become less and less important to the candidate(s) because he/she is going for the big bucks - because that is what ultimately makes or breaks a campaign.
I agree with you and would add that every last donation including $1.00 has to be accounted for including who gave and their pertinent information that can be checked.
I want full accountability. I think 2M is a fair amount for federal candidates. I get so tired of ads on TV/radio that I don’t want to turn on my TV or my radio. There should be a limit to how long a campaign can be run. Some candidates take office and start campaigning right away — ZERO comes to mind.
I am also for the limiting of out of district/state donations. If you don’t live in the district or the State, then donations need to be stopped.
You want real CFR, then stop the incumbent protection they have today. If you made it so only individuals could donate, it would go a long way in cleaning up donations. Limit what can be spent on a race and you would hear incumbents squealing like a stuck pig.
I think publicly held corporations and municipal unions shouldn’t be allowed to support any candidate or donate en masse to a general fund that would be distributed to a candidate.
That makes two of us. I think it is a travesty thata federal employee unions donate so much to candidates.
They need a different questions in their poll: Would you end anonymous donations to Obama from muslim donors in the middle east? Would you make the FEC enforce their rules about disclosure of sources of campaign contributions? Would you outlaw untraceable donations by credit card?
The other side of that is that if Congress governed only that commerce which was truly interstate, a lot of people wouldn’t care about the outcome of an election in the next state....
Wont matter a hill of sh!t.
People are always complaining about "special interests" as if it somehow taints the process, but along with the NRA is the teachers union. Along with "big oil" is the Sierra Club. We just have different special interests running the country now than before.
I never could understand how the AFLCIO and AARP were not special interests, and the NRA was. I may not be able to buy an election like George Soros, but I can join the NRA and give money to other conservative organizations to represent me. It's just that poorer people feel less significant and don't do anything. Well, the Tea Parties are something. Go to one this July 4th and be just one more speck in the crowd. How embarrasing would it be to have about 100 people show up for a rally to save America while we gripe here every night as if it is doing something to save America. If you have a few bucks, send it to a conservative organization. There are plenty that need your money. Even $10 makes a difference and we could probably all do without one Whopper, no onions, extra pickles, fries and a Diet Coke.
Limit the terms, not the money!
Certainly I believe in limits: NOBODY should be able to donate more than they have in the bank to cover the check! ;-’)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.