The only reason our legislators pander to the will of the corporations is because the corporations provide them with the funds that allow them to win elections. The corporations are able to check the effectivity of them buying votes yes, but that still doesn't make their votes any less valuable. They don't even have the desire to vote on legislation that concerns their constituents because their constituents would never even find out if they voted one way or another. To be honest in some cases it would probably be easier to sell their vote because there is no fear that their vote will be used as a weapon against them in future elections. What I was referring to though is the common man. How do elections work? What do we have to compare each candidate to? If one says one thing how are we to believe they will actually do that? Are we suppose to have faith in people who prior to the secret ballot did most of their voting based on which corporation could provide them with the most job security next election? Most politicians as it is now only care about keep their job, and I just don't think that enacting a secret ballot would make them follow the straight and narrow all of sudden. When you cut their job security (you don't allow corporations to funnel billions of dollars into elections with most of it being untraceable), then the only motivation a politican has is to do his job because come election time he won't have the millions of dollars to run a fancy campaign and make false promises, he will have a strict voting record for all to see.
How do you tell if they're representing you well? You see if the bills they said they'd introduce got introduced. You see what they brought back for funding. You judge them on the job they're doing, like we do now. How do you get A and B to happen at the same time? Secret ballots cut the balls off of lobbyists, what do you suggest we do to replicate that effect? You can't both get rid of vote buying and keep open ballots. One comes with the other. The second we introduced transparency in congress we started blowing up lobbying. I mean, what you just said in the above quote is literally my argument aside from that last line. I'm not sure how you magically get rid of vote buying when everybody can see how you vote. Even if you managed to reduce campaign contributions through legislation, you could secretly be selling votes under the table.When you cut their job security (you don't allow corporations to funnel billions of dollars into elections with most of it being untraceable), then the only motivation a politican has is to do his job because come election time he won't have the millions of dollars to run a fancy campaign and make false promises, he will have a strict voting record for all to see.
Not every Senator and Congressmen introduce bills during their term. Some even go as far to support a bill publically only to not vote for it when it comes to the floor. Now imagine that with a secret ballot. Now they could say they voted for a legislation even if they haven't because it makes them look good and it is literally against the law to find out whether what they say is true or not. Most corporations can fund 501c (4) charities and pour money into a campaign without anyone knowing they've done it. So right now you have no clue where a majority of their funding is. During the 2012 elections there was over 500 million dollars unaccounted for. PAC's and Super PAC's are still the more outright, but if you make a secret ballot the corporations could simply funnel funding through other channels and now you wouldn't know who is voting for what and who is paying them. What if they are investing in the future of the state or the country as a whole you would have no clue. Politicians currently want to keep their job and under a secret ballot they have every reason to lie to keep their job.
Yes you can by not allowing hundreds of millions of dollars flowing into campaign funds. Lobbying is fueled by their ability to provide campaign funds. The thing you seem to forget is the politicians still need money for their campaigns which will only become harder in a secret ballot which means they have more incentive to get money from people that can afford it. Until you change the structure of how campaigns work, secret ballots don't fix anything. You can't assume that people who were corrupted before are just simply going to be less corrupt because they are invisible now, if anything the new anonymity gives them more incentive to lie more than they already do. Ok so a scenario under new campaign finance law. Both campaigns have about the same funds so their platform becomes more visible and stuff. Out of no where candidate B puts an extra million dollars in his campaign fund. Now we can immediately become suspicious of that, on top of the fact it is illegal. The campaign is the most important thing for politicians they fundraise for it incessantly, literally all year round. When you cut funding, and force their platforms forward we get a better election and then lobbyist have nothing to bring to the table when they introduce a bill to a legislator.How do you tell if they're representing you well? You see if the bills they said they'd introduce got introduced.
You see what they brought back for funding.
You judge them on the job they're doing, like we do now.
You can't both get rid of vote buying and keep open ballots.
you could secretly be selling votes under the table.