giving money to affect politics is not in any form a charity.
it can be said that the very poor can afford very little in donations to causes or politicians. but the wealthy have a lot to donate. we could institute a progressive "taxation" in a sense. where a part of the donation is sent to the designated purpose --regardless if it is: a PAC, Politician, Lobbyist, etc.-- but on a progressive scale (based on the Citizen's current IRS tax bracket) a portion is diverted to the general election funds. a person giving a small amount $1 - $250 (something like that) can rely that almost every penny goes to their intended cause. but someone giving $5 million could rely that only a percentage of that amount will reach their "cause". the remainder going to the general election funds. and the wealthy always fight for lower and lower taxes. so we could inverse the way it functions. people fighting for lower taxes send more and more to the general fund. but those who end up paying higher tax percentages get to more directly influence their chosen cause.
an example would be like this:
wealthy person [A] pays only 15% IRS tax
donates $1 million to cause [1]
$150,000 goes to cause [1] and the remaining $850,000 goes to the general election fund
middle-class person [B] pays 25% IRS tax
donates $100 to cause [2]
$25 goes to cause [2] and the remaining $75 goes to the general election fund
the effects would be that so much money goes to the general fund that politicians will all jump to the middle rather than bait the far left or the far right. we would get normal people to run for office again rather than just the wealthy.
feel free to elaborate on this or claim it as your own idea, whatever.
Comments