Reply here with your suggestions. After the community decides on the answers for all three legislative campaigns, I’ll then share it with Cenk.
Original post
B) Federal
C) While I would love to ban the use of PACs and all that nonsense. That’s step 2. I think we should focus first on bringing to light all this “dark money”. I wish to know whose money is going to which politician because when you know who’s bought them the reasons for their actions are easier to highlight. I firmly believe the term dark money has no place in our political discourse. If we can get this small win I think we can use it as a building block to hopefully overturning Citizen’s United and the such.
3 Likes
(My thoughts, composed to invite discussion):
Would we (or not) agree we need publicly funded elections to mostly resolve our campaign finance issue? Assuming we do agree we need publicly funded elections, should our goal here prioritize that? Or, should our goal prioritize gaining information on dark money? (Bonus: if publicly funded elections is not most of the resolution, what else may be?)
If we prioritize a spotlight on dark money then we gain valuable information (useful against corruption issues beyond only campaign finance), and then we still need follow-up legislation(s) to more fully resolve campaign finance (and beyond). But on the other hand, if our goal is to resolve more specifically campaign finance itself, should we consider passing a more singular if more radical legislation which more directly gets to the root of campaign finance issue?; (eg: a legislation to make elections publicly funded, without threatening to expose the then mostly irrelevant dark money flows).
The aspects of this quandary are complicated with simultaneous pros and cons. Prominently, not exposing the dark money information, while less useful for broader anti-corruption, could be less threatening to some in power. Not threatening to expose dark money and instead making it mostly irrelevant would be a political gamechanger move, which could aptly realign political incentive structures and make further anti-corruption much easier even without dark money information. I wonder: should we prioritize gaining dark money information because it serves as an incremental means to other ends (such as but not limited to campaign finance reform), or should we prioritize resolving campaign finance as our (intermediate) ends, (with other anti-corruption legislations later, not limited to still exposing the financial flows of other deep capture operations besides just dark money).
Personally, I suspect prioritizing the incremental information exposure over the radical resolution is missing the forest for the trees. And I feel as if the more radical option could also actually be the simpler goal to achieve, (given the growing political appetite for anti-corruption; especially after ex-president tiny-hands is elected emperor). However, I’m not well informed on this. Perhaps in order to build political pressure to the point of passing publicly funded elections we should indeed first prioritize exposing dark money flows.
I think that summarizes my concerns. Please let me know what else we may want me to add; perhaps clarification, or maybe I missed the point of this thread. <3
So here is my attempt to integrate AI into this process please give me feedback that you have.
3. Political Financial Reform / Anti-Corruption Legislation:
Title: Transparent Governance and Corruption Prevention Act
Summary:
The Transparent Governance and Corruption Prevention Act is a comprehensive initiative aimed at reshaping political financial practices and staunchly combating corruption within the government. In addressing the specific concern of politicians being unduly influenced or captured by powerful industries, this legislation incorporates features inspired by the Sunshine Act and Spotlight Act. By shining a light on the intricate relationships between politicians and industry stakeholders, the act seeks to dismantle corruptive ties and ensure public officials prioritize the public’s interests over private gains.
Key Features:
-
Sunshine Act Measures:
- Full Disclosure Mandate: Requires elected officials to disclose all interactions, meetings, and communications with industry representatives, ensuring a transparent record of engagements.
- Real-Time Reporting: Establishes real-time reporting mechanisms, allowing the public to stay informed about ongoing interactions between politicians and industry stakeholders.
-
Spotlight Act Enhancements:
- Public Database of Interests: Creates a centralized and easily accessible online database containing comprehensive information about politicians’ financial interests, potential conflicts of interest, and contributions.
- Independent Oversight Body: Establishes an independent oversight body responsible for scrutinizing the disclosed information and investigating potential conflicts of interest.
-
Lobbying Transparency:
- Enhanced Lobbyist Registration: Strengthens the registration process for lobbyists, requiring detailed disclosures about the industries they represent, their financial interests, and the politicians they engage with.
- Ban on Gifts: Implements stricter regulations on gifts from lobbyists to politicians to minimize the risk of undue influence.
-
Campaign Finance Oversight:
- Public Financing Options: Explores and encourages public financing options for political campaigns to reduce the influence of private money in elections.
- Stringent Contribution Limits: Implements stringent contribution limits to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of a few wealthy donors.
-
Corporate Accountability:
- Shareholder Approval: Requires corporations to seek shareholder approval for political expenditures, ensuring that such spending aligns with the interests and values of the company’s owners.
- Whistleblower Protections: Enhances whistleblower protections for employees who report instances of corruption or unethical practices within corporations.
Addressing Industry Capture Challenges:
-
Sunshine Act Advocacy Groups:
- Support and Collaboration: Actively supports and collaborates with advocacy groups dedicated to upholding the principles of the Sunshine Act, leveraging their expertise to enhance transparency and accountability.
- Public Awareness Campaigns: Collaborates on public awareness campaigns led by advocacy groups to inform citizens about the importance of transparency in politics.
-
Spotlight Act Investigation Panels:
- Independent Investigation Panels: Empowers independent investigation panels under the Spotlight Act to scrutinize potential cases of industry capture, ensuring impartial assessments of politicians’ ties to specific industries.
- Public Hearings: Facilitates public hearings to shed light on instances of industry capture, allowing citizens to engage directly with the investigation process.
-
Civil Society Engagement:
- Public Forums: Organizes public forums and town hall meetings to encourage civic engagement and foster open discussions on the influence of industries on politics.
- Crowdsourced Oversight: Establishes mechanisms for crowdsourced oversight, allowing citizens to contribute information and insights regarding potential industry capture.
Rephrased Response with Synonyms:
The Transparent Governance and Corruption Prevention Act is a comprehensive initiative crafted to reshape political financial practices and aggressively combat corruption within the government. In addressing the specific concern of politicians being unduly influenced or captured by powerful industries, this legislation incorporates features inspired by the Sunshine Act and Spotlight Act. By illuminating the intricate relationships between politicians and industry stakeholders, the act seeks to dismantle corruptive ties and ensure public officials prioritize the public’s interests over private gains.
Key Features:
-
Sunshine Act Measures:
- Full Disclosure Mandate: Requires elected officials to disclose all interactions, meetings, and communications with industry representatives, ensuring a transparent record of engagements.
- Real-Time Reporting: Establishes real-time reporting mechanisms, allowing the public to stay informed about ongoing interactions between politicians and industry stakeholders.
-
Spotlight Act Enhancements:
- Public Database of Interests: Creates a centralized and easily accessible online database containing comprehensive information about politicians’ financial interests, potential conflicts of interest, and contributions.
- Independent Oversight Body: Establishes an independent oversight body responsible for scrutinizing the disclosed information and investigating potential conflicts of interest.
-
Lobbying Transparency:
- Enhanced Lobbyist Registration: Strengthens the registration process for lobbyists, requiring detailed disclosures about the industries they represent, their financial interests, and the politicians they engage with.
- Ban on Gifts: Implements stricter regulations on gifts from lobbyists to politicians to minimize the risk of undue influence.
-
Campaign Finance Oversight:
- Public Financing Options: Explores and encourages public financing options for political campaigns to reduce the influence of private money in elections.
- Stringent Contribution Limits: Implements stringent contribution limits to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of a few wealthy donors.
-
Corporate Accountability:
- Shareholder Approval: Requires corporations to seek shareholder approval for political expenditures, ensuring that such spending aligns with the interests and values of the company’s owners.
- Whistleblower Protections: Enhances whistleblower protections for employees who report instances of corruption or unethical practices within corporations.
Addressing Industry Capture Challenges:
-
Sunshine Act Advocacy Groups:
- Support and Collaboration: Actively supports and collaborates with advocacy groups dedicated to upholding the principles of the Sunshine Act, leveraging their expertise to enhance transparency and accountability.
- Public Awareness Campaigns: Collaborates on public awareness campaigns led by advocacy groups to inform citizens about the importance of transparency in politics.
-
Spotlight Act Investigation Panels:
- Independent Investigation Panels: Empowers independent investigation panels under the Spotlight Act to scrutinize potential cases of industry capture, ensuring impartial assessments of politicians’ ties to specific industries.
- Public Hearings: Facilitates public hearings to shed light on instances of industry capture, allowing citizens to engage directly with the investigation process.
-
Civil Society Engagement:
- Public Forums: Organizes public forums and town hall meetings to encourage civic engagement and foster open discussions on the influence of industries on politics.
- Crowdsourced Oversight: Establishes mechanisms for crowdsourced oversight, allowing citizens to contribute information and insights regarding potential industry capture.
By championing the Transparent Governance and Corruption Prevention Act, we are advocating for a transformative initiative that not only combats corruption but actively promotes transparency and accountability in political processes. This legislation represents a commitment to building a political landscape where the interests of the people take precedence over private gains, fostering a more equitable and just democratic system.
I think this makes for a good template to work off edit, expand, or contract scope / language.
I told it to use features of the Spotlight act however I don’t know if the name is taboo to take or if that is fair game so to speak? I also didn’t check the accuracy of its work so far so it may not know what the Spotlight act is. I figure is doesn’t matter much because we can change the name if needed. Also we can modify it if we like the Spotlight act better then our approach.
2 Likes
Thank you all @here for weighing in! We’d love to hear from more people so that we can then distill it all down into one short summary. As you continue to talk through this, remember:
- Is there a specific piece of legislation that has been introduced (this year or previously) that we should target? Something different?
- Keep it simple: Even though you are providing explanations and rationale, keep it simple for now. We’ll dive into the weeds and perfect things later. Let’s focus on getting as much participation as possible so that everyone’s ideas and contributions are welcomed and considered.
- If you don’t have all the answers, or answers to all pieces of legislation, that’s okay! Just do your best. Anything you have to offer is helpful and appreciated.
2 Likes
Pubic funding of elections is the way to go. I’m pretty well versed in constitutional matters and I don’t see any obstacle to this. If citizens united says we cannot limit speech, regardless of the donor, then the public at large can fund elections.
We need a legal strategy and a street strategy. And we need to make it clear to the people of this country that if we do not reform this system there will be hell to pay. Tyranny only goes so far before people stand up and fight, and that is what we need to do. We need to resolve ourselves to the notion that one way or another this system of corruption will end and we’re willing to pay the price.
Malcolm X said it’s either the ballot or the bullet and in that same spirit we must rise up and communicate clearly not only with words but actions that we’re not taking this shit anymore. Maybe we can call this the “Malcolm X Strategy”.
1 Like
That seems like a face palm marketing strategy. I think it is great to be inspired by other civil rights leaders, great…
I think if you market your strategy with the name of another civil rights leader you’re going to allow others to own the framing from the start. Maybe in spirit it is a good idea, using another’s name with so much pent up charged rhetoric against them seems like a self own (failing) for little to no perceived gain.
1 Like
I agree with both @sciguy24 and @enduser here.
Additionally, our general public is increasingly impacted by, (if not made aware of), our institutions’ disfunctions, especially in myriad perhaps seemingly disparate ways. People know the economy isn’t doing well, despite the malinformed metrics propagandized to the contrary. Our courts are illegitimated. Our anti-popular forever wars are offshored. Our politicians are literally mentally unwell. Etc, etc.
Some difficulty for the street marketing is in clarifying such intersections of corruption into a galvanized issue. Yet, the general apatite for anti-corruption seems to be growing, and can be expected to continue accelerating given the brinks politics are reaching. Our marketing wouldn’t need to radicalize people to the point of understanding as well as Malcolm X. Our marketing would need to be inclusive of political understandings and perspectives. How should we rally such a broad coalition on this issue?
I think the central issue is public funding of elections. Without it we can’t pass the rest of our agenda. Its so important I don’t think we should be focusing on anything else right now. I don’t know of any pieces of legislation currently in the house or senate for this.
1 Like
I stand by my opinion that first, we must get money out of politics. If we can do that, the system can start to function again as designed, by the people and for the people. How can we get the corrupt politicians to vote to take away the donors? Not likely since that’s money they need to campaign next election and keep their seat. I like the idea of publicly funded campaigns where each candidate gets the same amount and they do not have to find donors. It would solve the issue of donors being their Boss, but of course we have no incentive to give them to do this. At each turn, the corrupt system blocks fixing the problem. Someone smarter than me put in place a Convention of States which would override congress, the courts, and the president, to put us back on a progressive path. This is where our efforts should be.
1 Like
You’ve made good points. It sounds like a question is: how can lawmakers be incentivized to prefer publicly funded elections? Perhaps others with more campaign experience would have some insight.
My first thought is that some politicians face races in which they’re financially disadvantaged (relative to others in their races). That may be a dynamic we could explore to enable an incentive for supporting publicly funded elections.
Secondly, politicians might oppose publicly funded elections because they would stand to lose out on some advantage in being able to raise more funds (perhaps with name recognition or something). So, perhaps we could explore how to undercut such an advantage so that an incumbent would not think their reelection could be threatened by publicly funding elections.
Another random thought: might it be useful to initially have publicly funded elections at the state level, kind of as a stepping stone to federal level? Would this be something that might avoid some liability of otherwise initiating it federally?
I like this idea.
Forcing public funding could be bad with current PAC laws, but offering it up as a seed of sorts could be good.
I had GPT do some implementation strategy ideas for this effort:
Implementing the Transparent Governance and Corruption Prevention Act requires a thoughtful and strategic approach, especially considering potential resistance from vested interests. Here are some implementation strategies that could prove fruitful:
-
Gradual Phase-In:
- Implement the legislation in phases, starting with measures that have widespread support and are less likely to face significant opposition. This allows for a smoother transition and builds momentum for more comprehensive anti-corruption measures over time.
-
Stakeholder Engagement and Education:
- Engage with stakeholders, including businesses, industries, and political groups, to educate them on the benefits of transparent governance. Highlight how reducing corruption can lead to a more stable and ethical business environment, attracting responsible investment and fostering economic growth.
-
Public Awareness Campaigns:
- Launch extensive public awareness campaigns to inform citizens about the importance of the legislation in fostering a corruption-free political environment. A well-informed public can act as a powerful force, advocating for the legislation and putting pressure on elected officials to support anti-corruption measures.
-
International Partnerships:
- Collaborate with international organizations and governments experienced in combating corruption. Drawing on their expertise, sharing best practices, and seeking support can enhance the credibility and effectiveness of the anti-corruption measures.
-
Whistleblower Protection Programs:
- Strengthen whistleblower protection programs to encourage individuals to come forward with information about corruption. Establish mechanisms to ensure the confidentiality and safety of whistleblowers, fostering a culture of accountability.
-
Technology and Transparency Tools:
- Leverage technology to enhance transparency. Implement digital platforms that enable real-time reporting and disclosure of financial transactions, making it harder for corruption to go unnoticed. Ensure the user-friendliness of these tools to encourage widespread use.
-
Independent Oversight Bodies:
- Establish independent oversight bodies with strong investigative powers. These bodies should have the authority to conduct thorough investigations into allegations of corruption, ensuring impartiality and credibility.
1 Like
-
Cross-Party Collaboration:
- Encourage cross-party collaboration on anti-corruption initiatives. Emphasize that these measures benefit the political system as a whole, regardless of party affiliation, fostering a united front against corruption.
-
Incentives for Compliance:
- Provide incentives for businesses and individuals to comply with anti-corruption measures. This could include tax benefits, recognition, or other positive incentives that encourage ethical behavior.
-
Continuous Evaluation and Adaptation:
- Establish mechanisms for continuous evaluation of the effectiveness of anti-corruption measures. Be prepared to adapt and refine strategies based on ongoing evaluations and emerging challenges.
-
Civil Society Participation:
- Involve civil society organizations in the implementation process. These organizations can act as watchdogs, ensuring accountability and transparency, and can also play a crucial role in educating the public about the positive impacts of anti-corruption measures.
By combining these strategies, you can create a comprehensive and adaptable approach to implementing the Transparent Governance and Corruption Prevention Act, overcoming resistance and fostering a culture of transparency and accountability in political and financial processes.
Why couldn’t we have a Justice caucus that was composed of any party affiliation united under finance / corruption reforms?
1 Like
I think a precision strike at dark money would have far less opposition than public funded elections, but it is definitely less change. It is something that can move quickly, probably being able to force lawmakers to put their names on a yes or no vote before the 2024 election.
Not going to stop the legal bribery, but it can be a step forward.
Would be happening even if the bill doesn’t pass.
This could be a more feasible idea and would start a great movement to make a difference, but I live in a very red area and I’m sure it could never happen here while the dis/mis info is so prevalent. Seems this would take very different resources depending on location.
4 Likes
Another idea for this.
Trying to breath life back into AOC/Gaetz’s bill that would ban members of Congress from trading stock. Not sure how much pulse is left there but a good idea is a good idea. Plus we have a little name recognition on our side to work with cause the big thing here would be holding them and anyone who supported this feet to the fire.
A) Reintroduce H.R. 3003 (Cortez/Gaetz’s Stock Trading Ban Bill)
B) Federal
C) Members of Congress should not be allowed to take part to what is akin to insider trading while ordinary citizens are penalized or imprisoned for the same thing.
4 Likes