Time To Restate My Proposed Campaign Finance Reform Position

 I posted a number of different versions of this over the years at Blogging Blue. Hopefully I remember it but it shouldn't be too much of a problem given it is fairly straight forward. But with all of the hand wringing and gnashing of teeth from both sides of the aisle around multi-millionaire's contributions to political parties that are then passed on to candidate's campaign funds for the current Wisconsin State Supreme Court race, it is time to bring it up again.

So here goes:

Only eligible voters may make contributions directly to the campaigns of candidates that they are able to vote for, without limit.

So what does that mean? Well Soros and Musk couldn't contribute to campaigns outside of their home districts/states. Contributions must go directly to the campaigns so any and all contributions would be recorded and published. No PACs. No Unions. No businesses. No political parties. (Political parties can still provide infrastructure for party candidates but not direct contributions any more).

So I can contribute to the campaign for a Wisconsin gubernatorial candidate but not for one in California or Illinois. I can contribute to a Milwaukee mayoral campaign but not Madison. I can contribute to my local alderperson but not one across town. 

The without limit part? Well, why not? Since all contributions will be public information it would be easy to identify the rich folks trying to buy influence in the government. But overall it should reduce the amount of spending on campaigns and hopefully reduce the lies and misinformation created during the typical campaign. But I am just trying to head off a complaint here.

Does this need a little more definition? Probably, but the intent should be fairly apparent to most everyone.