Campaign Finance Reform: How would a conservative write the law?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Anytime politicians begin regulating ANY industry the the lobbiest are sure to roll in either to:

A) try and gain favorable legal status

B) defensively ward off harmful laws

C) harm a competitor

This is wrong on so many levels it beggars the imagination.

Citizens United vs FEC (rightly) showed that restricting how people--even when formed as a corporate body--spend their money is a 1st Amendment violation. But what politicians can accept is another matter altogether.

Personally, I'd like to see a law that says politicians cannot accept money from any industry regulated by law.

I don't know how effective that would be because money is fungible and the AFL-CIO can take its extortion collected dues and still run independent ads for their favored whores candidates. Ditto banks and the rest of them.

So what would be a good law?

[The Village Idiot]

What we need is to ban government from playing favorites.

Like GM over Ford, Toyota for instance.

We need to get government out of the business of managing the economy. period.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Yes, but how?

What sort of legal language would you propose?

Something like, "No elected official shall accept into their campaign funding any monies derived from persons, corporate bodies or industries regulated or contracted by legislative act or operating within their constituencies."

[The Village Idiot]

It is a lot less trouble Constitutionally just to abolish all government management of the economy than trying to restrict how people spend their own dollars in politics, political free speech was really one of the biggest reasons for the first amendment.

[docstew]

Yes, but how?

What sort of legal language would you propose?

Something like, "No elected official shall accept into their campaign funding any monies derived from persons, corporate bodies or industries regulated or contracted by legislative act or operating within their constituencies."

sounds ok, except by applying it to persons within their constituencies, you infringe upon 1st Amendment rights.

How about "No elected official shall propose legislation that could reasonably be expected to benefit one corporate entity or person over another."  Should cut down on the carve-outs, i.e. automakers headquartered in Michigan, products produced by unions, etc.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

sounds ok, except by applying it to persons within their constituencies, you infringe upon 1st Amendment rights.

How about "No elected official shall propose legislation that could reasonably be expected to benefit one corporate entity or person over another."  Should cut down on the carve-outs, i.e. automakers headquartered in Michigan, products produced by unions, etc.

I was hoping to draw a distinction between what people can campaign for vs what a politician can accept but your idea works well for me.