Sorry Kellis, I disagree strongly.
When you say “the federal government set aside” I see “my tax money given to people I may not agree with”.
Is the current system faulty? Absolutely! The fact that the Clintons have grifted their way from in his case, a backwater, second rate horse racing town and, in her case, a hard line socialist college education to the most prominent positions in the free world, lead me to think that if “the federal government” controlled the dispersion of those funds , those funds would be given only to those “the federal government” deemed “worthy” of those monies.
I don’t trust them to spend MY money. It is my right, as an extension of the first amendment to support who I choose. That is why the McCain-Feingold reforms should have been vetoed.
Sorry for the wordy sentence in the previous paragraph.
So how do you prevent politicians from from being bought by special interests via campaign contributions ?
You dismissed my solution. What is your solution ?
Perhaps private money should be allowed, and those contributions should be vetted and identified — as now — to the FEC, but the candidates must remain ignorant of who gave them the money ? That doesn’t seem workable, as groups would announce themselves who they’d given money to.