Posted on 08/27/2020 5:35:59 AM PDT by karpov
A third of Americans fear being fired for their political beliefs. Unfortunately, for those who wish to support political campaigns, federal and state laws leave no place to hide.
“Cancel culture” has divided First Amendment advocates. Some argue that private actors must tolerate differing views for free speech to survive, while others say the only concern should be government intrusions on speech. But when private individuals target and harass other Americans for their political donations, the government can’t say it plays no role.
Campaign contributions are public because the law requires it. Every American who gives more than $200 to a candidate for president or Congress, or to a political party, has his name, address and employer published in an online, searchable database. Every state has similar laws for reporting contributions to state candidates, many with substantially lower donation thresholds.
It wasn’t always this way. The earliest laws mandating that donations be reported date only from the late 19th century, and weren’t seriously enforced, by states or Congress, until the 1970s. Even then accessing reports required visiting a government office and digging through paper or microfiche records. Unless donors’ contributions caught the attention of investigative journalists, few were widely exposed.
Today, the laws haven’t changed, but the technological and cultural landscapes have shifted dramatically. Anyone can look up your donations in seconds. Most Americans still prefer to judge candidates through news coverage and campaign materials. But others regularly mine these databases not so much to inform their decisions but to gain information that can be used to harm candidates—and, more important, donors to candidates—that they oppose.
In 2019 Rep. Joaquin Castro tweeted the names and employers of opposition party donors in his district, leading some to receive threatening phone calls.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
One approach would be to establish banks and brokerage firms as qualified intermediaries who receive political donations and pass the money on, with the donor kept secret, even from the candidate or party. This would help to break the connection between donations and political favors, which is the reason for disclosure laws in the first place.
Consider, if a foreign government can spend a hundred billion dollars to gain control of the American government, it is much, much cheaper and more effective than a war.
Far less risky as well.
The American foreign policy toward China in the 40 years before Trump, was very close to what the Chinese wanted.
On that point, you're 100% incorrect. My employer is one of the very few (IMO) that's an absolute stickler for complying with the law.
While I don't agree with everything my employer does, we do have a very strict code of ethics that the organization follows. I've yet to see our org's leadership do anything legally questionable in any way. It's a source of great pride that they do not and one of the reasons our clients choose us.
I've seen the bank lose money for a client (based on the clients instructions and despite their advisors recommendation) and then turn around and make that client whole. Not just our "largest of the large" clients either.
You and I don't often hear it these days, I do have a sense of pride in working where I do. Our Senior Exec's do right by our clients and by our people.
That's a common tactic and yes, it does get reported if it's systematic (repeated by the same individual.) FEC reports would easily catch that.
Just like withdrawing $9,999.99 from a savings account repeatedly every month. If you think you're side-stepping the AML laws by taking out less than $10k all the time, think again.
There, fixed it.
“I wonder if they realize they’re shooting themselves in the foot with such tactics?”
I think the same thing about incessant sales calls from companies after I make a single purchase. It’s the 21st century. We have the internet. If I need something, I know where to order it and I don’t need a salesperson pestering me. Making a sales call to me (at least making more than one a year) is only guaranteeing I’ll never buy from you again.
I suppose this tactic used to work to get sales (or donations) at some point. Maybe it still does. But it will never work with me.
They even have apps the lefties can download now to see where the Republicans live in the cities.
Oh well, let them come to my house. They’re not all going to walk out.
I can look at where all the DEMS are in my county, too....it’s public information...every Precinct Committee Person has the info, if they want it.
Totally agree!
She also went on Stephen Colbert, and went asked about the violent riots, said they WILL not stop, nor SHOULD they stop, and for us to BEWARE.
Are we in America or what? She is a US Senator, and she is not defending the First Amendment right to peaceful protests, she is INCITING and ENDORSING citizens using violence, including bombs, guns, fires, and looting, against fellow Americans. How can anyone rational vote Democrat?
She's a female Obama and ValJar protege, and has the same hatred of the country that those two Marxist knuckleheads possess.
Interestingly the FEC does NOT appear to have caught it wrt this Dem rep in question, even though he has many $199 contributions from the same source.
Anonymous donations are not legal, even if they are under reporting threshold.
Not very Senatorial behavior for someone who is a US Senator.
Not just private, but ANONYMOUS. You can’t sell influence if you don’t know who is buying. Americans should be allowed to donate any amount they wish to any candidate or party they choose; that’s FREEDOM. But a quid-pro-quo result turns it to BRIBERY, a crime. Punish it accordingly.
See my post #37...they should not only be legal, but mandatory. Can't sell influence if you don't know who's buying.
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.