There’s also the issue of the media itself. The candidate favored by the main stream media gets billions of dollars in essentially free advertising because of the constant stream of positive coverage of their campaigns.
No candidate could ever raise enough money to compete with that and limiting donations would only make that disparity even worse.
I can’t speak for Mike but as long as all donations are listed publicly I’m fine with it.
If you are going to limit campaign donations then we’d also have to force equal coverage and equal time on the press with the same amount of positive and negative coverage for all candidates in every race.
That’s so funny!!! 
No I am not OK with that. The first problem is that the amounts you are suggesting would violate federal campaign finance laws and I presume most state campaign finance laws. And, should you get elected, any quid pro quo would be unlawful and a conflict of interest.
It would also be unusual for Congress to pass a very specific statute with respect to a chemical. The EPA was created with an enabling statute that created the executive branch agency and gave power to create administrative regulations. The Executive branch is responsible for the Agency actions and the regulations that are made by the agency. If you think about it, do you believe ANY Senator or Representative has the scientific knowledge required to determine how many parts per million of sulfur in diesel fuel is dangerous for the environment or how much the flatulence of a cow disturbs the world’s CO2 production? This is all part of the separation of powers so vital to our form of government.
And, as I indicated in my earlier response and @WildRose addressed, the press would have complete control over what the public saw and would take over the electoral process.
I want to point out why I believe that any kind of registration associated with Firearms is a dangerous thing. The writers of the 2nd Amendment had defense from a Tyrannical Government in mind. The People of Germany under the Weimar Republic Government during Hitlers rise to power fell into the “Slippery Slope“ Process of Gun Registration. And when Hitler came into power he knew exactly who had Guns and had no problem confiscating them. I don’t know about you but I don’t trust the US Government now or in the future. In my State of Arizona a person doesn’t need a CCW to carry a Concealed Weapon. So the only Record the Authorities have is that I passed a Background Check when I bought a Gun. And I like it that way.
I don’t think that The Gun Control Advocates and the Policies they put forth would make any difference to a Criminal.
this is something I think we are pretty much at the mercy of right now… and it would remove ANY semblance of fair elections if it got worse.
That’s Classic:joy:
!!! …Joe Biden is so “Full of Bull” and can’t remember one moment from the next. He would probably agree with you and say those are 10 round magazines, are now in compliant;>))
I knew this was funny when I had to explain to my youngest son what AOL was 
We still use them for spacers on the table saw.
Now that is funny!
Poor Joe. Someone has to remind him each morning to put his pants on.
Biden didn’t write that. He would have said ‘Clips!’
Whoever wrote it for him doesn’t know that magazines have no serial numbers or uniquely identifying features necessary for any registration.
Politicians are often the least qualified to be making gun laws, as illustrated here.
Well some politicians are pure evil because they predict future but current NON-EXISTING technologies like the asinine micro-stamping requirement! Look at how pathetic the gun roster is in Commie-fornia.
We shoot our AOL discs. 
I registered with the Constitution. That’s all I need to do Joe.