Why businesspeople and their family members should be banned from donating money to political parties?

Why businesspeople and their family members should be banned from donating money to political parties?

Corruption is a major roadblock to making real progress in any society. It holds back democracy, slows down economic growth, and breeds governmental instability. 

One practical solution to tackle this issue is to stop businesspeople and their families from donating money to political parties. This simple change could make a huge difference in cutting down corruption’s influence and power.

Let's face it: when businesses donate money to political parties, it often looks like they are just trying to be good citizens or supporters of democracy. However, we all know that there's always more to it. In my 26 years leading a major business organization in Georgia, I’ve seen it happen time and again; business owners throw in large sums for campaigns and expect something in return. It’s like a shady barter system, where politicians and governments owe favors to their donors rather than serving the people who actually voted them into office.

For instance, think about that time a big corporation pushed really hard for tax changes that favor its business during an election cycle. They had their hands in the pockets of those politicians, and suddenly, the needs of the average citizen were nowhere to be found on the agenda. 

Instead, the politicians were much more concerned with keeping their wealthy sponsors happy. When politicians are tied to these massive donations, it’s no surprise that they often prioritize the interests of a few over the many. The political arena then becomes a playground for the rich and powerful, like a game of monopoly where only a select few get to play.

The consequences of these donations go beyond just favors and tax breaks. We often see that those businesspeople who contribute generously to ruling parties end up winning all the tenders and contracts, getting access to lucrative privatizations of state-owned properties, and having the legislative landscape shaped to suit their business needs. I mean, how many times have we heard stories about a seemingly random unknown business winning a major government contract, only to discover they are a cover for a powerful businessman and have donated money to the ruling party? It creates a cycle where the rich get richer, and the general public is left wondering why they’ve been shut out of opportunities that should be available to everyone.

These wealthy donors wield immense power, effectively writing their own rules and changing legislation at will to benefit their enterprises. They can maneuver through the bureaucratic maze as if it were a red carpet, ensuring that their interests are prioritized over public welfare. I remember a discussion I had with a friend who works in public service. She shared how frustrating it is to see essential services or state resources being handed over to donors while the everyday citizen struggles to get by. This feels all too familiar and puts the entire system into question.

Imagine how efficient it would be if we took away the chance for businesses to throw money at political parties. People would start trusting politicians again because they'd no longer look like they were owned by corporations. 

Many voters feel disillusioned today, frustrated with the notion that their representatives are more interested in lining their pockets than caring about the concerns of their constituents. If we cut off that financial lifeline, lawmakers might start actually listening to the voices of the public rather than the wallets of a handful of influential donors.

On top of that, limiting business donations could open the doors for smaller parties and independent candidates to find their footing. I’ve always thought it was unfair that in a political system so saturated with money, the little guy is often pushed aside. Without rich backers, independent candidates often struggle to get their message out. By dialing down the influence of money in politics, we could finally make way for a more diverse range of voices.

When it comes to how we engage politically, we need to shift our thinking; instead of seeing donations as a ticket to power, we should promote real, grassroots involvement. It is people enthusiasm for progress and change that move countries forward. 

In the end, fighting corruption means being bold and making choices that put integrity back in charge. Banning business people and their family members from donating to political parties isn’t just a technical fix, it’s about changing the whole mindset around political engagement. 

This shift could turn our political landscape into one that truly represents the people. By addressing the core issues that fuel corruption, we can build a fairer system for everyone, creating a political environment that genuinely serves the people rather than the select few. Just imagine how much better our country could be if we took that step.

Fady Asly -August 28, 2024

Giorgi Sanikidze

Strategic Advisor | Crisis Management Expert | 25+ Years with UNHCR | Emergency Preparedness and Response Consultant | Fluent in Georgian, English, Russian

4mo

Corruption is when officials exploit regulations and bans for personal gain. Do you think reducing regulations and digitising processes would be more effective in cutting down corruption than adding more regulations and bans?

David Matsaberidze

Associate Professor. PhD. Department of International Relations, Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University. Researcher @ CA 22121 / COST; Academic Member @ JoPScip / CBHE; Analyst @ INIS & SRAS.

4mo

Interesting view, but what about lobbyists and this practice, common to most of democracies?

Like
Reply

To view or add a comment, sign in

Insights from the community

Others also viewed

Explore topics