The Hill: Clinton's campaign finance proposal weak on details

[portlander23]

Clinton's campaign finance proposal weak on details

First, the proposal laments that we do not know who is behind the secret money that has grown in the last three federal elections. Will the Clinton campaign apply this concern to its array of financial supporters, including the political organizations that do not voluntarily disclose donor names and are working to advance her name? This is a decision that Clinton would seem to have control over right now — and could impose the same rules she recommends for the future — on her campaign today.

Second, the proposal bemoans the access of the "wealthy and well-connected" to government. Will a Clinton presidency forbid those with such a history of access, including lobbyists and campaign contributors, from serving in the administration? Establishing a policy now to award jobs based on other credentials, including knowledge of policy areas and experience in government, would greatly alter the historic practice of rewarding supporters with prime posts in government.

Third, Clinton claims that she will sign an order that requires all government contractors to disclose political spending. But once contracts are awarded, it would seem a little too late turn the lights on. From the first day after the election, during the so-called presidential transition period, an assortment of companies, interest groups and individuals seek to influence the new administration. This period, though, is not regulated by many of the sunshine laws and transparency measures that set in after the inauguration. Will the Clinton transition team adopt an even more aggressive ethical standard and transparency practices, such as President Obama's team did in 2008?

At the end of the Clinton proposal, we are assured that "this is only one part" of a larger plan. As they do for every candidate in the field, voters need to know much more about the details of how a Clinton White House would operate. This type of information will help voters evaluate what they will be getting when they go to vote in November 2016 and possibly revitalize the democracy.

[upaloopa]

1. More bull shit thrown at Hillary

The other side is spending close to a billion dollars to win the White House and in 2016 you need money to combat that.
Nothing can be done about campaign finace if you are not in power. And in 2016 you need to fight fire with fire.
If you think you can run a Presidential campaign in 2016 on $30 donations alone you live in fantacyland. I don't want to put my future in the hands of people who live in fantacyland!

This is a lot like how libertarians make their speeches. You can say anything as long as you know you will never have to actually govern.

[ibegurpard]

3. And someone who relies on that campaign finance model

Will never be able to change anything about it. So here we are.

[jeff47]

4. That's an entirely different subject.

This is talking about her proposal to fix it. And the lack of details in her proposal.

That is something completely independent of exploiting the current system in a way demanded by "pragmatists". You can make specific proposals while still exploiting the current system.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. I'm sure, after evolving, she'll return the CorpMoney and refuse to accept any more.

Then again...maybe not.