Suggested Discussion Outline

[johnkarls]

.
Money in Politics - or "The Best Government That Money Can Buy"!!!

A. FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT OF 1971 and McCAIN-FEINGOLD ACT of 2002

A-1. Public-financing of political campaigns (if the candidate forswears private financing).

A-2. Approved by the U.S. Supreme Court in all important respects – McConnell vs. FEC (2003).

A-3. Not used from 2008 forward because the public-financing amounts are so pitifully small.

A-4. It would be “child’s play” for any attorney to draft statutory changes that would provide for adequate financing and that would extend public financing to Senate/House races.


B. THE BEST GOVERNMENT THAT MONEY CAN BUY

B-1. Public prosecutors will NOT prosecute pols for criminal fraud of voters despite zillions of slam-dunk cases.

B-2. Public prosecutors will ONLY prosecute pols for criminal corruption which, per the U.S. Supreme Court, requires an explicit “quit pro quo” (aka, “bargained for consideration” in contract-law legalese).

B-3. Pols ONLY REFUSE to double-cross campaign contributors because everyone knows that any pol who does so will NEVER AGAIN be able to raise money from serious campaign contributors.

B-4. So-called “bundlers” (aka “bag men”) assemble campaign contributions from donors who wish to “bribe” a pol vis-à-vis a particular issue and then, when a sufficiently-large amount is assembled (which can be an infinite amount despite limits on individual contributions because the “bundler” is representing zillions of contributors), the “bundler” proceeds to “bribe” the pol without an explicit “quid pro quo.”

B-5. Obviously-foreseeable problems with appointing Public Prosecutors who will prosecute pols for Criminal Fraud of voters -- even though it should be a slam-dunk exercise to institute a public campaign to enact a Federal Statute providing for such special-purpose prosecutors.

B-6. Inadequacy of campaign-contribution limits under the Federal Election Campaign Act as limited by US Supreme Court “Freedom of Speech” cases --

Buckley vs. Valeo (1976) and McCutchen vs. FEC (2014)
Citizens United vs. FEC (2010)


C. EXTORTION BY POLS

C-1. Honeypots that the pols maintain – e.g. “Carried Interests”

C-2. Pols continually EXTORT campaign “contributions” from the beneficiaries of these “honeypots” by threatening to eliminate them

C-3. Hedge-Fund manager compensation gets capital gains treatment as “carried interest”

C-4. Movie-Star earnings get capital gains treatment as “carried interests”

C-5. EXTORTION INEFFICIENCY of honeypots (vs. public finance)

C-6. ANTI-DEMOCRATIC aspect of ANNOINTING HONEYPOT BENEFICIARIES as the “Las Vegas Bookies” who decide American elections (since the honeypot beneficiaries will place their own “bets” on which extortionist-pols are likely to win and which wannabe extortionist-pols are not)


D. SELF-FINANCE BY ZILLIONAIRES

C-1. No limit under the Campaign Finance Act re amounts Zillionaires can contribute to their own campaigns.

C-2. HOWEVER, the Campaign Finance Act does require reporting of contributions Zillionaires contribute to their own campaigns.

C-3. REPORTING by Zillionaires was involved in the Michael Cohen - Stormy Daniels imbroglio and resolved by the FEC’s long-standing “dual purpose” rule that an expenditure that has BOTH campaign and non-campaign objectives (e.g., domestic tranquility) IS NOT a campaign contribution and, therefore, need not be reported.

C-4. Uncertainty about whether the U.S. Supreme Court would approve extending LIMITS (as well as reporting requirements) to contributions by Zillionaires to their own campaigns.


E. SIX-DEGREES-OF-SEPARATION E-MAIL CAMPAIGN TO MEGHAN McCAIN

E-1. Whether the easiest (though by no means easy) solution would be re-addressing our 5/16/2018 E-mail Campaign to Sen. McCain to Meghan McCain.

E-2. Presumably Meghan McCain would be interested in honoring the memory of her father.

E-3. Presumably her colleagues on ABC’s “The View” are patriotic and would support the campaign for as long as it takes.

E-4. The text of our 5/16/2018 E-mail Campaign to Sen. McCain is available at viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1753&sid=7f3f40027 ... ed3355ae06.