Andrew Yang Policy on DEMOCRACY DOLLARS

[Sherman A1]

The trend over the past half century has been to allow unfettered spending in elections. This culminated in the decision made in Citizens United, allowing unlimited money to be spent by corporations in elections.

It’s no surprise that this has resulted in mega-donors flooding the pipes of our democracy.

We need to diminish the influence that mega-wealthy individuals and companies have in our elections. While we must push for a Constitutional amendment to allow our campaign finance laws to properly limit the power that the top 1% have, we must act much faster to save our democratic processes. To do so, we must make it possible for all Americans to contribute to candidates they feel strongly about, in order to drown out the voices of the few who can spend millions of dollars to influence our politicians.

The easiest way to do this is to provide Americans with publicly funded vouchers they can use to donate to politicians that they support. Every American gets $100 a year to give to candidates, use it or lose it. These Democracy Dollars would, by the sheer volume of the US population, drown out the influence of mega-donors. It has been used in Seattle to great effect, and we can take their program national to move towards publicly funded elections.

https://www.yang2020.com/policies/democracydollars/

[PBC_Democrat]

1. I'm starting to like this guy

He has several very interesting positions, not sure if he has a chance but definitely worth watching

[Sherman A1]

2. I agree

he has many well reasoned ideas.

[crazytown]

3. This is the policy that dents, if not totals, Yang's electability.

This is what the 4chan and 8chan folks have been ridiculing.. Kamala Harris’ LIFT proposals would provide cash payments but only for those earning $3000pa or more..

I’m personally in favour of this proposal extended to children as well at a level which would end welfare agencies. So was Nixon.

Bit it is my personal opinion that with today’s politics, it is suicide. I don’t have a poll to back me up, but that is my belief.

[Sherman A1]

4. Not sure how providing money to go to

election campaigns of the citizens choosing would dent or total his electability and I really wouldn't think extending it to children would be a really good idea. I would think we would want the person at least eligible to vote in the same election?

[WeekiWater]

5. I'm a little disappointed he doesn't know a constitutional amendment isn't the only way to do this.

"While we must push for a Constitutional amendment to allow our campaign finance laws to properly limit the power that the top 1% have"

The SC even mentioned another way to achieve the same goal in one of their opinions when they struck down a section of McCain Feingold. Far too many people don't understand the decision the SC made in Citizens United. Yang appears to be one of them.

[BannonsLiver]

6. Gillibrand also has proposed this idea.

Easily one of the dumbest I have ever heard in politics, from the name to the actual idea itself. I think this would be about as popular as syphilis with most people.

[dalton99a]

7. Ok. "Contribute" $100 to a candidate who gives you back $80 in cash