

A proposed amendment to the US Constitution relating to campaign finance - privong
https://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/19/text

======
gremlinsinc
If only our forefathers would've had the sense to put a no donation /
fundraising clause for elections... instead the gov't would give a lump sum--
equal to each candidate, and that is the ONLY money they could use for their
campaign and they would have to make it stretch the best---we'd have some
tight leaders who can actually budget sensibly if that ever happened.

------
rrrx3
Unfortunately it won't go anywhere because it doesn't have bipartisan support.
Not a single R cosponsor. If it somehow passed the Senate, it would die in the
House. What a waste.

------
Uhhrrr
This is a good idea, but how does it affect the Hearsts and Murdochs of the
world? It looks like it wouldn't. Maybe it shouldn't! I think there will be
many fun discussions around this.

~~~
venomsnake
Lets deal with the Koch-s first. If the internet remains free (a whole other
fight), the media moguls influence will diminish.

But its a snowball's chance in hell this will pass.

------
higherpurpose
Congress _shall have power_? That doesn't sound right to me. I thought the US
Constitution was based on stuff the government is _not_ allowed to do, not on
stuff it's allowed to do.

I don't know but I have a bad feeling about the way this amendment is written.
I think it could be abused by the government in ways we're not expecting right
now.

~~~
Arnor
The phrase "Congress shall have power" occurs 3 times in the original
constitution and another eight times in the various amendments.

I agree that congress is probably not the best body for setting campaign
finance regulations, but I don't think there's anything in this particular
amendment that's out of line with the rest of the constitution.

