While I don't condone the level of harassment & demagogy they receive, there is still a solid argument for publicizing the roles of megadonors like Steyer, Koch, Soros, Gill, Mercer, Adelson, et al. You play that big, it's news. But a campaign's 15,000th largest donor?https://twitter.com/Tom_Maguire/status/1159567106809245702 …
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I leafed through Buckley v Valeo (1976) in which the tension between free speech and association versus public disclosure was discussed. Goal of outing corruption won, subject to subsequent review. Castro's stunt was what people feared, avoided. Reporting limit was, IIRC, $10.
-
TBF, the real concern centered around minor nutters like the American Nazi Party. People didn't anticipate "Are you now or have you ever been a donor to the Republican Party?" But no one expects the Spanish Inquisition.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What's actually happened in the real world to small donors to warrant this change? Just the hypothetical of retaliation?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Addresses are "public information" too. Still doxxing, and doxxers still deserve old country justice as far as I'm concerned.
- Show replies
-
-
-
Free speech but secret speech at the same time? That’s quite an argument to make.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The issue is that contribution limits increase every year, but the disclosure cap isn't raised. While you max out at $2,800 per person, you have to be disclosed if giving over $200. It makes more sense to raise the disclosure amount to over $1,000.
-
Polite disagreement: it is still worthwhile to keep track of smaller donations for ideological reasons. In particular the Islamist Money in Politics project at Middle East Forum tracks donations from Islamist activists to politicians.https://www.meforum.org/islamist-watch/money-politics/ …
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
What might make sense is to make public record names of donors above a certain threshold ($1,000?) only after a primary or general election. Not sure what's to be gained by making those names & any irresponsible action, as Castro's, part of the election dynamic.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.