Our pre-McCutcheon campaign finance system was already broken
To the choice few who can donate more than $123,200 to political campaigns, congratulations! You have a newly expanded right to free political speech, which few others in America can afford. Thats your latest prize from a Supreme Court that is intent on promoting the interests of the rich, no matter how much elevating a small number of hyperelite voices effectively crushes a great many more. So heres a pat on the back, really. Youve earned it. Or at least you paid for it.
This isnt the first campaign finance law the Supreme Court has struck down, and it wont be the last. With elected officials from all parties increasingly beholden to big-money interests and spending nearly as much time fundraising as actually governing and with the hyperwealthy given both a larger megaphone and a stronger arm the question is, Now what?
Ian Vandewalker, counsel for the Brennan Center, told me its troubling that we see money as speech and that such a system means legislators spend more time fundraising than working on behalf of their constituents. But the more insidious issue, he said, is which voices politicians are hearing and how that skews policy and governance.When legislators have questions about the problems were facing and how can we solve them, theyre hearing from the people with the big checks, he said. Frankly, rich people and average people have very different ideas about what our problems are and what the solutions might be.
Public financing means broader and more diverse representation. If your campaign funding is mostly made up of constituents giving $50 or $100 donations that are multiplied into $300 or $600 donations, the influence of the rare constituent who can afford to write a $5,000 check is greatly reduced.
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/4/scotus-supreme-courtmccutcheonvfeccampaignfinancepublicfinancing.html
Help to end the system of corruption here: http://www.rootstrikers.org/#!/
and here: http://www.wolf-pac.com/