We should stop calling large amounts of money paid to politicians "contributions" - they are BRIBES

[slay]

pure and simple. And we, the people, will never have that kind of bribe money. :mad:

*on edit - i'm talking about HUGE amounts of money - the kind only the super rich and mega-corporations like AT&T and BP and the like can afford to pay.

[grantcart]

1. well we should differentiate - they are "legal bribes" as opposed to all of those

evil SOBs in other countries that dirty themselves with "illegal bribes".

[DrDan]

2. any money given to a politician could be considered as a bribe

for our tiny "contributions", we want something also.

right?

[provis99]

3. in order for it to be a bribe, the politicians would have to do something for us.

When you give a donation, do you really feel our politicians do anything for us in return? If only...

[Rex]

5. So true!

Bribe really is the wrong word...for most of us at least. The uber-rich probably consider it a bribe.

[slay]

7. They are bribed NOT to do anything for us - by huge industries like big oil, big pharma, etc

huge industries basically buying people in congress to represent THEIR interest, not the interests of the people. until we get big $$$$ out of politics, we are fucked. we will never have the money to challenge them. and if they get their way, we'll barely have enough to survive at all.

[rurallib]

4. Yes indeedy. And those getting the bribes are the same ones

who must vote to stop the system.
Unless we could pass a constitutional amendment. But guess who controls that process for the most part......

[sandnsea]

6. Except when someone buys the Alabama CON Chair

Apparently that's okay because a friend of Rove's prosecuted.

That's what Siegelman did, demanded a $500,000 donation to a legislative campaign so he wouldn't be on the hook for it.

It's rare that the money is as obvious a quid pro quo as it was in this case though.

[ipaint]

8. Bundling=bribes

Bundling for Favors:
Open the Books on Bundled Campaign Contributions

What is bundling and who is a bundler?

Bundling describes the activity of fundraisers who pool a large number of campaign contributions from political action committees (PACs) and individuals. Bundlers, who are often corporate CEOs, lobbyists, hedge fund managers or independently wealthy people, are able to funnel far more money to campaigns than they could personally give under campaign finance laws.

While there are disclosure requirements for bundling, they only go into effect when a bundler personally hands over checks. Most campaigns get around the disclosure provision by not having the bundler ever touch the checks. Mandatory disclosure of all bundled contributions – regardless of whether the bundler touches them – is the very least we can do to address this new way to evade disclosure laws. Disclosure of bundling activity could be achieved either through a new law from Congress or by an improvement in FEC regulations.

snip...

The Bush and Kerry campaigns evaded the disclosure regulation for earmarked contributions through the new style of bundling activity in which identification numbers are assigned to each bundler, who in turn ask contributors to write the bundler’s ID number on the checks and then give the checks to the campaign on their own. This allowed the bundler to get credit from the campaign for the contributions, while sidestepping the FEC’s official disclosure requirements.

Bundlers for the Bush camp who raised at least $100,000 through this method were given the honorary title of “Pioneer” and privileged treatment by the campaign committee.

cont...

http://www.whitehouseforsale.org/bundlingproposal.cfm



"The purpose of the campaign-finance law is to limit not just donations but the influence of donors," said Alexander Cohen, a senior researcher at Public Citizen, a nonpartisan consumer advocacy group that conducted the study for the Journal. "So when you can drive up with a truckload of money to give to a candidate, it's hard to see how that's limiting influence."

The study documents for the first time the rise of mega-bundlers and the ease with which they get around normal donation limits. Many have raised hundreds of thousands of dollars single-handedly, often with just a flurry of emails and calls to business associates and relatives. Mikal Watts, a prominent product liability lawyer in Texas, raised $285,000 from 10 partners, including himself, for the joint fund-raising committee of Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee.

...In the Republican camp, Scott Rothstein, a Florida lawyer, said he has raised $1.1 million for Sen. John McCain and is in his "kitchen cabinet." Nothing was easier than soliciting money for the presidential candidate's joint fund-raising account, McCain-Palin Victory 2008, he said. At a fund-raising event at his Fort Lauderdale home this year, Mr. Rothstein and eight of his colleagues donated a total of $569,000 to the account.

...Donors are allowed to give as much as $70,000 to the accounts. The accounts legally skirt fund-raising limits because the money doesn't go directly to candidates. Instead, it is split in legal-size chunks between national and state political parties that then spend it on behalf of the presidential candidates.

more...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122584462604899359.html


Just because there where many legit individual donations does not mean big money donors don't bribe with huge contributions. Given that the majority of money was given by small individual donors and that couldn't even buy americans a weak public option, big money "donations" rule the day and get the favors time after time.