<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Campaign-Finance on The Solutions Are Known</title><link>https://holmgrown.com/tsak/tags/campaign-finance/</link><description>Recent content in Campaign-Finance on The Solutions Are Known</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><copyright>Howard Holm</copyright><lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2026 01:07:53 -0400</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://holmgrown.com/tsak/tags/campaign-finance/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Money in Politics</title><link>https://holmgrown.com/tsak/articles/money-in-politics/</link><pubDate>Sun, 11 Oct 2026 20:59:14 -0400</pubDate><guid>https://holmgrown.com/tsak/articles/money-in-politics/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Every citizen has one vote. We do not have the same ability to put an
issue on the agenda, fund a campaign, or keep an argument in front of
the public. Some of that is unavoidable. People have different
skills, audiences, and commitments. But persuasion earned through
public support is not the same as influence bought with a fortune, and
a democracy ought to tell the difference.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;We need to reverse the constitutional rule from &lt;em&gt;Citizens United&lt;/em&gt;,
along with broader campaign-finance reform. Of course, people must
have the right to criticize government, organize, publish unpopular
arguments, and challenge the people in office. The design problem is
protecting those freedoms without treating unlimited money as an
untouchable part of political liberty.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>