• Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 days ago

    No, that’s not how that works.

    18 U.S.C. § 597 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 597.

    Whoever makes or offers to make an expenditure to any person, either to vote or withhold his vote, or to vote for or against any candidate; and

    Whoever solicits, accepts, or receives any such expenditure in consideration of his vote or the withholding of his vote—

    Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

    • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 days ago

      That seems pretty straightforward. So the law is correct, it’s just useless because the system founded on these laws is broken.

      • isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 days ago

        I didn’t realize Ayn Rand’s ghost had a lemmy account.

        This isn’t broken at all. Unless you think every form of government social spending should be illegal, then you shouldn’t try to make it a felony for politicians to run for office promising to establish government programs or give people money through acts of Congress. You’re advocating for full on libertarianism.

        • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 days ago

          I think you are confusing paying someone a direct bribe for their vote, with infrastructure spending. When you say it isn’t broken at all, are you saying that an imperfect dystopia based on power and money is the utopian goal that we all seek? I say a lot is working, but a lot is broken. When you say ‘not broken at all’ then I cannot believe you have a good understanding of the societal wherewithal.