This seems like the wrong place for such a proposal. It seems far too shallow to be taken seriously in terms of rationality, politics, or economics. More something to chat about while high in a dorm room.
Two trivial (to make) objections: The obvious equilibrium is to spend $1 on the books, and $infinite in indirect non-legislated support. And it’s utterly impossible to implement or enforce, as it violates basic constitutional voting rights.
This seems like the wrong place for such a proposal. It seems far too shallow to be taken seriously in terms of rationality, politics, or economics. More something to chat about while high in a dorm room.
Two trivial (to make) objections: The obvious equilibrium is to spend $1 on the books, and $infinite in indirect non-legislated support. And it’s utterly impossible to implement or enforce, as it violates basic constitutional voting rights.
It’s no more impossible to enforce than existing campaign spending limits.