Donors: Give - OK, Get - Not

Amitai Etzioni
{"title":"Donors: Give - OK, Get - Not","authors":"Amitai Etzioni","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2851989","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current state of campaign finance laws is undermining the democratic system, yet various limits on the amounts that can be donated were considered by the Supreme Court to violate the First Amendment. This article proposes that instead of focusing on limiting what people can give to politicians seeking office — limiting what they can get in return for their contributions. Cases of mutually-beneficial exchange should be treated as bribery, so long as the benefit applies to the contributor in a discriminatory manner. For this approach to be successful, the current interpretation of quid pro quo corruption needs to be modified.","PeriodicalId":415389,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Campaign Finance Law & Policy (Topic)","volume":"77 8","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Campaign Finance Law & Policy (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2851989","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current state of campaign finance laws is undermining the democratic system, yet various limits on the amounts that can be donated were considered by the Supreme Court to violate the First Amendment. This article proposes that instead of focusing on limiting what people can give to politicians seeking office — limiting what they can get in return for their contributions. Cases of mutually-beneficial exchange should be treated as bribery, so long as the benefit applies to the contributor in a discriminatory manner. For this approach to be successful, the current interpretation of quid pro quo corruption needs to be modified.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
捐赠者:给予-可以,得到-不行
目前的竞选财务法正在破坏民主制度,但最高法院认为对捐款数额的各种限制违反了第一修正案。这篇文章建议,与其把重点放在限制人们对寻求公职的政客的捐赠上,不如限制他们从捐赠中得到的回报。互利交换的情况应被视为贿赂,只要这种利益以歧视性的方式适用于供给者。要使这种方法取得成功,就需要修改目前对交换条件腐败的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pay Now, Play Later: Political Contributions and Underwriting Relationships in the Muni Market Donors: Give - OK, Get - Not Citizens United: A Theoretical Evaluation Sunshine’s Shadow: Overbroad Open Meetings Laws as Content-Based, Distinct from Campaign Finance Disclosure Laws, and Constitutionally Suspect Judicial Campaign Financing: An Ever Present Threat to Judicial Independence
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1