I am near-paranoid about the effect of large campaign contributions, or
small ones bundled into PACs. I as a Green Party member don't like
either. On the other hand I see nothing wrong - but only good - in lots of
little $25 contibutions. Greens can run on very little money, but they
need SOME, for lawn signs, flyers, etc.
I don't like large contributions or PACs because givers gain unequal
power, and are seen as gaining unequal power, thus undemining the
democratic equalitarian base of the party. Who are any of us at a
meeting when the Big Giver walks in and speaks? Chopped liver.
On the other hand, if we know that all of us are $25 contributors, I have
no problem not having a list of all those $25 givers.
R Peterson states "but a whole lot of $25 contributions from the same
place can certainly buy influence just as much as one single [big, I
assume] donor."
So are you going to require that "the place" be named also? Or suppose
lots from older people, or blacks, or Jews, or gays... Should age and
race and religion be reported too? Sexual preference? All associations one
is a member of? If not, how can we tell if they're from "the same place"
or not?
Further, if a lot of people of any sort contribute, they SHOULD have more
infuence. You promise Green values; Green value people contribute; if you
then go corporate, you have sold out and broken all your promises. What
just one person wants should have little power to decide public issues -
but what many want should.
So, unless there are other more persuasive reasons, I can see no need to
name $25 contributors.
--David Shove
On Sun, 4 Feb 2001, Russell Wayne Peterson wrote:
> I just have to re-iterate that I think this practice of reporting individual
> contributions that are more than a "certain arbitrary number" is
> discriminatory. If we are going to report contributions, we should report
> all contributions.
>
> The problem here is that we are making the assumption that only big money
> individual donors can buy influence. This is discriminatory and an
> erroneous assumption. $25 might not buy influence, but a whole lot of $25
> contributions from the same place can certainly buy influence just as much
> as one single donor. And I still believe equal protection under the law is
> appropriate here.
>
> Russ Peterson
> Ward 9
> Standish
>
> _______________________________________________
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
> Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> http://e-democracy.org/mpls
>
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
