Campaign finance reform

Returning the America electoral process to a more individual citizens oriented union involves changes on three levels

1)lobbying - or influencing the public officials
3) voting - This is where I believe is where our tax dollars should go - seeing that every eligible American can and does get to vote.

2) election campaign funding This is the one I have given the most thought to. The central issue is locking down the abilitity to game the rules and creating  an envorionment that mininizes its beign gamed. Let's be honest, politicans sell their vote for a price. Its been that ways since the raise of elected officicals or what western society (ir > America calls democarcy. IT comes down controlling the flowe of the money or more directly channeling its flow. No law can close every loopwhole but we can structure an arrangement that minizes flagrant abuse and corruption and returns it to a more people-oriented democracy that the founders invisioned. I guess I grew up under the illusion that America was a people-scaled society that cared about its own. I feel its no longer that way and I don't like where it has gone. So here's my idea.
- I am against (tax/government revenues) public- financing of candidates and want the government effort to go in seeing that all americans can and  do vote. More on that in the second segment.
- ONLY registered votes can give financially to  the electoral process. - candidates, issues, any matter that resolved through electoral/vote.
- there is no limit on the amount an individual can give to any one candidate or electoral issue.
- but an individual registered voter can only fund those candidates and issues in which they can vote on. Thus every american can give to presidential election, only in state to governor/us senator, in district to Us HR, state money
- a campaign can only accept loans equial to is amount can nvere20% of the amount raised and of that only 10% of that amount can come from non-registered voters, this amount can nvere be for given. Named individuals.
- all contributions must be posted on an official website, accessible to all, within 7 days of the funds clearing.
- expenses must be posted quarterly, thirty days follwoin g the end of the quarter.

What they really don't want is 100% voting. Limits on voting and poor turnout are their tools to mantain control. Public financing of candidates would only institutionalize the existing parties - imagine politcians deciding how ,much tax dollars they are going to give themselves to run for re-election. Public financing should go toward making sure all citizens vote. Only registered voters can give to and against candidates and issues and ONLY for candidates and issues they can actually vote on. NO MORE texans deciding who's going to be the senator from North Dakota. Candidates and politicans would no longer be able to accept $$ from anyone who can not vote for them. It would greatly curb Super pacs, bundling, and lobbying contributions. 'If you can't vote on it, you can't give to it.' Since corporations can't vote, no corporate money could be used. It would force politicans to serve their constituency, the very foundation of geographic representation. Hey, if those who can vote for you wouldn't give you any money, maybe they don't want you! It would also curb careerism and allow third, fourth parties to get into the game.