February 1, 2013
Dear Sirs:
Please don't get me wrong: basically all political contributions are bribery - inducements for politicians to vote with their pocket-book, not their conscience. This process serves neither the good of the country nor the majority of their constituants. Political contributions corrupt the democratic process, ensuring that those with the most money will be heard first and last. Anyone who says that cash is other than a bribe, is a spinning apologist for the rich against the needs of the majority of ordinary people. I am even against the principle of ANYONE, small or large, giving money to candidates, (excluding state-sourced equal funding to all candidates and parties.)
That said,under the present system; where we allow the buying of votes, secrecy should not be an option. Those who are funneling money to candidates should be required to disclose its source. All candidates and parties receiving this payola should disclose its source, so voters can decide who they want to represent them: someone with the county's welfare at heart; or just another corporate sponsored politician. Disclosure is the bst way to mitigate the effects of this influence. Short of barring representatives from voting on issues that effect their donors, at least there should be no secrecy on the part of either the givers or the receivers of monetary support.
It is time for the public to smell the failure in their governmental systems and get rid of inside money and secret influence. At least, if we cannot cure the disease of influence peddling, the SEC should ensure that secrecy is replaced with some modicum of transparency.
Bob McPherson, Edmonton
Dear Members of the Securities and Exchange Commission:
It's long past time to end secret political spending by corporations.
So I strongly support the SEC issuing a rule in the near future that would require publicly traded corporations to publicly disclose all their spending on political activities.
Both shareholders and the public deserve to know how much a given corporation spends on politics (directly and through intermediaries), and which candidates are being promoted or attacked.
Thank you for considering my comment.
Sincerely,
Bob McPherson