Public financing won’t stop officials from taking bribes
Nonsense. That best describes the use of flagrant taking of bribes as a reason for public financing of political campaigns. If there were these so-called reforms, as noted in a recent News editorial, how would that stop public officials from taking bribes for favors?
Bribes and scamming money are crimes, not campaign contributions. There is no causational relationship to contributions and bribes unless the contributions have the explicit intent to violate the law with a quid pro quo. If that is the case, no restrictions can limit this from happening. If people want to break the law, they will, regardless of restrictions on the amount of contributions. These law violators should be prosecuted.
Restricting financial contributions by whom? Corporations, unions, public interest groups, non-profits, etc.? Isn’t restricting contributions a violation of freedom of speech? Do we have selected OK groups (NYPIRG, but not AFL-CIO)? That’s discriminatory.
If one wants to check campaign contributions, make it a law to publish all contributions on the various media so that voters can see where their representatives receive money and how they vote. Restrictions ensure more incumbency because state legislators have state-supported funds to “inform” their voters and it is not counted against them as spending for re-election. A challenger begins in the hole.
John J. Pilato Sr.