This was a suggestion I read as a joke on the ever present reddit. The idea was that politicians should wear logo’s on their suits that would show the viewer quickly who they are sponsored by. Sizing the logos to the relative amount of the total contributions the candidate had earned and the amount that particular company had donated.
I realize it might be a dead horse which has received the most brutal of beatings but this is actually a fantastic idea. Generally speaking the world has become increasingly complicated with the advent of the internet and the globalization of business. Businesses can change policy in a matter of hours and the world moves past so quickly no normal person can keep up.
Really it should not be the responsibility of every citizen to constantly investigate who their candidates are working for. These biases and briberies pass with far more frequency and speed than is reasonably possible to be knowledgeable of. News stations already do this, at least the more honest ones, stating openly that they are owned by certain companies (like GE) when the story is related to those entities. This helps set a nice knowledgeable and level playing field for the viewer and the speaker, both sides know the critical information to help keep their interpretation of the information clean and clear.
This sort of transparency should be expected and celebrated. No person who isn’t embarrassed by their own actions or partners should find objection in this and anyone who does shouldn’t be in a position of policy making.
Similarly no person with any previous or current investment into companies should be able to work on the boards of regulatory agencies related to those same companies. Much like you must be a certain age to run for Senate or President you should need a certain amount of years between your previous job and any regulatory job that is related. A half or full decade would certainly seem a safe spacer, if a person can retain their biases and greed’s for that long than I’d wager it’s safe to assume they’d be a danger to politics regardless of what you did (short of never letting them in).
It’s somewhat sad to see such noble systems tainted by the greed of very small populations of people (percent’s of a percent), I do believe that policies like these could help improve our standing in terms of positive policy making. Likewise the only thing standing between these sort of changes and them actually happening is the voting population. If we can increase the amount of voters in the US by 10 or 20% we could easily overcome propaganda from party news stations, corporate commercials, and the city level manipulation. These things only work because currently you merely need to dupe a very small population of Americans, a population unfortunately that is largely comprised of folks who are the very same demographic that is most preyed upon by email, phone, and identity scams.
I’m hopeful. As silly as the idea sounds and as unlikely as it is to be implemented, it would be wonderfully informative.