I suspect most big givers give big because they expect to get back big. Records show they often succeed. Most of the money for higher offices comes in big batches from the richest 1% of the population, and records show they usually get it back at least 100 to 1. Paid for by the official out of our public resources.
There is in fact little motive for them to give just to the ideology of their choice - they give to the *individual* of their choice, who is then indebted to them. Less important than getting him/her elected is having him/her know just who put them there, and will help or hurt them next time around. Many big givers give to members of both parties in a race, just so they will be indebted. The elite will fight against blind trusts just as much as they would low limits on campaign giving. Both would end bought officials, the last thing they want to see. If we want to own our officials, WE have to buy them, all of us together, in lots of tiny contributions, and/or public financing out of progressive taxes. The last is the way to make the rich pay for a system they don't like but we do, and so I'm for it. --David Shove Roseville On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, c lee wrote: > Has anyone ever pushed for a blind trust idea for campaign contributions > over a certain amount? > Elected officials often set up blind trusts in personal investments/estates > ... sure some very creative people could get around it (conversations at > cocktail fundraisers, a whisper in the ear of the candidates' treasurer) > but... > > Just throwing that out there...any other ideas for LOCAL campaign > reforms...keep it clean and creative. > > Happy Winter Solstice and a Joyous HolidayTannenbaum (does holiday come from > Holy Day?) > cheryl Luger > > _________________________________________________________________ > Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > > REMINDERS: > 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. > If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL > PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. > > 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. > > For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html > For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract > ________________________________ > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn > E-Democracy > Post messages to: mailto:mpls@mnforum.org > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls > REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
