Topic: 2013-04-24 Examiner - Presidential candidate only accepts Bitcoin contributions (Read 931 times)
April 25, 2013, 09:50:40 AM
Well, there's also the point that the reason campaign contributions are limited is so that (at least in theory) candidates won't be unduly influenced by large donors. But with the ability to send the donations anonymously, that really shouldn't be as much of a concern. In addition, why not just make all donations where any info on the donor is provided public information readily accessible? Instead of trying to use a bureaucratic attempt to reduce corruption in politics, use sunshine.
April 25, 2013, 08:52:49 AM
In order to keep from getting campaign funds from foreigners candidates are supposed to get the name and address of every donor. Even when accepting bitcoins as another New Hampshire candidate discovered a few years ago.
I think this is Perry's point. The whole FEC is unconstitutional since a campaign contribution is actually an act of political speech so First Amendment protected. And because he is refusing US dollar donations then he doesn't hit the $5,000 threshold that triggers the bureaucratic machinery now built up around electioneering. He's basically trying to opt-out completely and go full bitcoin, litecoin ....
April 25, 2013, 01:50:22 AM
In order to keep from getting campaign funds from foreigners candidates are supposed to get the name and address of every donor. Even when accepting bitcoins as another New Hampshire candidate discovered a few years ago.
Whitepages is the solution
April 24, 2013, 11:40:50 PM
In order to keep from getting campaign funds from foreigners candidates are supposed to get the name and address of every donor. Even when accepting bitcoins as another New Hampshire candidate discovered a few years ago.
April 24, 2013, 11:24:37 PM
If he wins, I'll definitely move to the US 
Jump to: