6 February 2012, 4:04 pm
I'm pretty sure I've seen this idea before, but I can't find it now. In a two-person U.S. Presidential race, one person's $100 donation to one candidate effectively cancels out a $100 donation to the other, which is a waste; we'd be better off if all $200 went to a neutral, uncontroversial charity instead. I want to create a voluntary way for Americans to make that happen. Here's the plan: Create a website where people can donate to either Barack Obama's campaign or the Republican nominee's (it'd go live once the Republican nomination is clinched... for purposes of illustration, assume it's Mitt Romney.) I hold the donations in escrow until some predetermined date (say, September 15th.) Then, I check the donation totals. Say Obama got $1000 and Romney got $900. Then I'd sent $1800 to the Against Malaria Foundation, and the leftover $100 to Obama. Everybody gets to support their candidate--every dollar donated to Obama led to Obama getting one more dollar, while every dollar donated to Romney prevented Obama from getting one more dollar. The question, of course, is how to do this while staying in line with campaign finance laws. One approach could be to act as a "bundler"--I'd collect the legally mandated info on every donor, and then after September 15th I'd let them know whether their money has actually gone to their candidate or whether, since it's technically gone to charity, it doesn't count against their individual donation limit. Another approach could be to raise money, not for the candidates' committees, but for SuperPacs, which presumably means a lot less regulation but also means that donors have to trust more third parties. Any thoughts on potential legal obstacles and ways of overcoming them? You'll be helping to siphon money away from attack ads and into preventing malaria.... Read More »
Share on del.icio.us
Share on digg
Share on Technorati
Share on reddit
Share on Yahoo!
Share on Facebook