Friend, On 12 17 95 jimbell@pacifier.com proposed ...a system...that would "blind" campaign donations as to their source: The donor could be satisfied that his dona- tion gets to the candidate or cause, but the candidate could- n't know who actually paid the money (and the donor would be unable to prove that he made a donation...). Let's analyse: A gives B what B wants (money) so that B will give A what A wants (whatever). A knows B got the money. A can't prove he gave the money to B. B knows he got the money. B can't be sure that A gave the money. So, depending on time, place, and circumstance; and assum- ing B's elected: B will not give A what A wants OR B will give A what A wants For instance, if... A gives the money but dies before B gets elected. A gives the money but gets sent to the Balkans. A is a nobody. ...B will not give A what A wants. For instance, if... A gives the money but B's already in debt to him, and the baloon payment's due. A gives the money and A's appointed head of an office where B's relatives "work." A is the main man in town. ...B will give A what A wants. Some things are known by some people whether they're entered on the books or not. I agree with the proposer that his system ...would change politics as we know it. Flexible corruption is best. Cordially, Jim