How is "public financing" of campaigns feasible....

[Smarmie Doofus]

.... whereas congressional attempts to limit $$$ legalized bribery are unconstitutional... according to the RW SCOTUS, anyway?

Mr. Hartman was discussing this on the radio machine yesterday. He said this was the way to go. But didn't explain how this would/could pass muster .

Wouldn't the gang of five likely toss a public financing system?

[NoNothing]

1. There are two main ways of spending money on an election:

First, is to give money to the candidate or their party. These donations are restricted by law, and these restrictions are clearly constitutional. Public financing would likely restrict this further and add public funds. All of this would be constitutional.

The second way is to spend your own money saying good or bad things about the candidates. This is what was held to be protected by the First Amendment.

[Smarmie Doofus]

2. Thanks. Misconception on my part. NT

[SoCalDem]

3. Viable candidates get the same amount of FREE airtime

on special channels created for electioneering.

A dem channel
a repub channel (hahaha I know they already have one)
an independent channel

Their "pool" of available money would be for print ads, banners, travel, etc...and they would all get the same amount.

Donations would be pooled and divided equally between viable candidates.

Any corporate/lobbyist money would be illegal.

No "campaigning" for more than 6 months before an election.

I know it's hard for people to believe, but in some places it's ILLEGAL for candidates to accept corporate money, and campaigning is limited in time & scope.

In the US, we've morphed the election of our officials, into a nasty game with no rules..