No. of Recommendations: 3
"to the point that a Facebook poster suggests that politicians wear suits covered with donation stickers, like Nascar drivers."

Since restrictions on political giving can have free speech problems, I always thought the best way would be to turn the problem around. Put the onus on the politician accepting the bribe, er I mean donation.

I think politicians should be required to know the background of each donor above some nominal amount. Then the politician should be forced to abstain from voting on any issue that would affect one of his known donors as a conflict of interest. So if a Big Oil executive gives money to a politician the politician would be required to abstain from any vote that would affect the oil industry. If a union gives money to a politician the politician would be required to abstain from voting on any union issues.

This makes bribing, er donating money to, political officials counterproductive. If you give them money they cannot vote for your issues. It also aligns political ethics more with common sense ethics. In any job I have ever had if I accepted any gift (greater than a nominal amount) from a vendor or customer whose business my decisions affected, I would be fired on the spot.

It will never happen of course because when would a bribe taker ever vote against taking bribes?
Print the post  


What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.