There will always be abuses. Many situations cannot be eradicated. But they can be made better - through vigilance rather than more laws.
Such a change would require bipartisan support. How would you convince Democrats that this was not anti-poor? Hell, I'm as Republican as one can get and I'm not convinced.
The first step towards convincing anyone, is by frankly discussing the problem, as we are doing. There are a great many people, who are very disturbed at what they perceive as a dumbing down of political debate in America; a pattern, where more and more the politicians appeal to the least qualified voters and the voters with the most to gain by voting a certain way. We need a real soul searching in America, as to how our institutions can be expected to endure, with the obvious deterioration in the quality of our political discourse.
One of the most graphic examples of what I am discussing may be provided by comparing the intellectual content of political campaigns and political speeches in the early days of popular suffrage--that is shortly after the Jackson era--and those today. If you go to a library with sufficient archives and start reading the campaign offerings in the 1840s & 1850s, for example, and comapre them to the intellectually naked, 30 second sound bites of today, you--as a thoughtful man--will not fail to be struck by my point. You may propose to simply live with it, but I am still idealistic enough to believe that something can be done about it. Hence my proposals. (Universal Suffrage--Threat To Liberty)
William Flax