[bdw5204]

If the bribe is paid as a "campaign contribution" to a politician or to a group that runs ads to get a politician elected, it is "free speech" according to SCOTUS in Citizens United v. FEC. If it is paid directly to a politician or to a politician's friend, it is illegal bribery.

It would also be perfectly legal to hire a politician or regulator who advanced your interests once he's no longer in office. There is, in fact, a revolving door between many industries and the agencies that regulate them. But you can't explicitly promise these individuals a job while they're still in office or you committed illegal bribery. A politician also can't sell a Senate appointment (as the governor of Illinois infamously tried to do after Obama was elected president) but he can give it to one of his political allies as a favor and reasonably expect that the favor will be repaid in the future.

Of course, these differences aren't particularly meaningful in reality but they're very important under the law and anybody who is stupid enough to execute their bribes the wrong way will probably be punished for bribery even though it would have been perfectly legal if they'd done it the right way.

[dvt]

This is an incredibly reductive take. Campaign contributions are carefully monitored. So you can't, like, buy yourself a house in Martha's Vineyard with campaign contributions. In fact, it's illegal for a politician to even be in contact with a super PAC (even though they may be campaigning for them). There have been many lawsuits that have settled this.

Citizens United is problematic not because "money is free speech" (which, frankly, it is, as we live in a capitalist society) but rather because corporations (specifically when donating to Super PACs) have no caps on donation sizes. Fun fact: that money is not taxable income, by the way. So they can (in a roundabout way) essentially fill a friendly politician's coffers "for free."

[Zircom]

This is an incredibly naive take. There's countless ways and examples of how to get campaign funds into your own pocket. Speaking fees, books, your campaign hiring family members or friends, buying goods and services for your campaign from your own companies, etc. It happens all the time.

[bdw5204]

Plus winning an election means you're more likely to get those opportunities to make money. Most members of Congress are millionaires [0] and it has nothing to do with their salaries (which barely cover the cost of maintaining 2 residences given how high cost of living is in DC) or their pre-existing wealth before they run for office.

[0]: https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2020/04/majority-of-lawmake...

[dvt]

> There's countless ways and examples of how to get campaign funds into your own pocket.

I mean, while this is technically true, it's also a bit silly to think it's untraceable--many people that attempt to do this get in trouble for it[1]. As someone that owns a Super PAC, while I don't consider myself some kind of absolute authority, I do know some of the regulatory hurdles one must go through. I get it, you watched John Oliver do his little song and dance, but reality is a bit more complicated.

[1] Just to cite a famous-ish case: read about Conservative Strikeforce Super PAC.

[Zircom]

If you could point to exactly where I said it was untraceable or that people don't get caught doing it....? Yeah. Please don't put words in my mouth.

I'm fully aware it's by no means a risk free or foolproof venture, but you're the one being silly if you think the amount of cases where people are caught committing crimes is anything but a small percentage of people actually committing said crimes, especially white collar crimes like this. They're just the ones that were unlucky and/or not smart enough to get away with it.

And honestly you're being more than a bit condescending and not really arguing in good faith, so not interested in continuing this conversation. You have a nice day though :)

[maerF0x0]

And that's why Citizens united should have focused on citizens, not corporations.

Corporations have not votes. Citizens do. A step forward could be to bar corporations from any action in the voting process (their constituent citizens like employees, owners, board etc can do what they wish as citizens, if they're citizens) .