1) regulatory capture exists is because you give power to individuals to make decisions for the collective.
2) freedom of speech will always mean if I have money, I can spend it any way I want. That will never change. Therefore, it is impossible to limit money in politics.
Once you understand these 2 principles, its very simple to understand the solution. Money will always impact politics. You simply need to raise the price enough so that you won't end up in regulatory capture.
1) Dillute power. Cause representatives to govern a fixed number of people. For example, 1 house member for every 50,000 people. So the house would go from 431 to 6500. That would make it very expensive to hire lobbysts to capture.
2) Limit power. Term limits for aggregate public service so people can't peddle power of public office. This makes lobbying expensive since you can't permanently buy favor.
3) Randomize outcomes. By far the most powerful. Introduce uncertainty into election successs. Randomly switch winners for the house with state at all levels. So for example, a citizen from VA running for president could end up instead as a state senator for VT, or FL (and vice versa). Same thing for vice president, and any other public post. You want to make sure the "bet" on a candidate win is a very long tail in outcomes so that lobbyists don't really know what power they are actually buying by contributing to the candidate's campaign. Given that we had people like Bush, Obama and Trump in highest office, with varied levels of public office "experience", I think it is a given that there is no real qualification for running for X, other than being a US citizen of a certain age, and actually winning.
That's how you fix the current corporatism running amok in america.
1) regulatory capture exists is because you give power to individuals to make decisions for the collective. 2) freedom of speech will always mean if I have money, I can spend it any way I want. That will never change. Therefore, it is impossible to limit money in politics.
Once you understand these 2 principles, its very simple to understand the solution. Money will always impact politics. You simply need to raise the price enough so that you won't end up in regulatory capture.
1) Dillute power. Cause representatives to govern a fixed number of people. For example, 1 house member for every 50,000 people. So the house would go from 431 to 6500. That would make it very expensive to hire lobbysts to capture.
2) Limit power. Term limits for aggregate public service so people can't peddle power of public office. This makes lobbying expensive since you can't permanently buy favor.
3) Randomize outcomes. By far the most powerful. Introduce uncertainty into election successs. Randomly switch winners for the house with state at all levels. So for example, a citizen from VA running for president could end up instead as a state senator for VT, or FL (and vice versa). Same thing for vice president, and any other public post. You want to make sure the "bet" on a candidate win is a very long tail in outcomes so that lobbyists don't really know what power they are actually buying by contributing to the candidate's campaign. Given that we had people like Bush, Obama and Trump in highest office, with varied levels of public office "experience", I think it is a given that there is no real qualification for running for X, other than being a US citizen of a certain age, and actually winning.
That's how you fix the current corporatism running amok in america.