Open Letter to the FEC
To whom it may concern,
This letter is being sent on behalf of the Darryl W. Perry for President (2016) campaign.
I would like to inform you that on behalf of the campaign, the FEC will not be receiving a Statement of Organization, Statement of Candidacy, any financial reports, etc.
As you know, current federal campaign reporting rules want a candidate (or committee) to begin filing with the FEC after collecting or spending $5,000 dollars towards a campaign; an amount virtually unchanged since the 1970’s.
As a libertarian, I do not believe the Federal Election Commission has legitimate authority to regulate the fundraising of candidates or donations of those giving to candidates or their campaigns. In fact, as you are likely aware, the 1974 amendments to the FECA were challenged in the case of Buckley v. Valeo. It was argued in Buckley, “Restrictions on campaign contributions and spending… constitute restrictions on speech as surely as would a statute directly prohibiting an individual from speaking… The mediating factor that turns money into votes is speech. More money leads to more communications supporting the candidate. More communications supporting the candidate leads to additional votes… Advocacy cannot be proscribed simply because it may be effective.”1 In a per curiam decision, “[t]he Court upheld contribution limits because they served the government’s interest…”2 That is the absolute worst reason to uphold legislation that limits an individual’s right to association and speech.
The Darryl W. Perry for President (2016) campaign will not be accepting donations in currencies recognized by the federal legal tender laws, instead the campaign will only accept Bitcoin, Litecoin and precious metals. The campaign will not accept any donations via cash, credit/debit card, check or money order.
The campaign will be using one Bitcoin wallet (Bitcoin wallet id: 1DWP16K2oeZEsX5z6vPWsZJ7GB5ajt
I intend this to be the last communication I have with this commission as part of my campaign.
In Peace, Freedom, Love & Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry
1 Brief of United States p. 53, Buckley v. Valeo, p. 1, cited in Mutch, p. 56
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/
2 Appendix 4
The Federal Election Campaign Laws:A Short History
http://www.fec.gov/info/
” …not that he realizes that offering to accept contributions in precious metals is totally symbolic”
Not necessarily. Some people may contribute, also symbolically. It’s not as if metals are never spent or contributed.
“Gresham’s law does not really apply to bitcoin, which is so far little more than a curiosity, ”
On the contrary, there are now over a billion US dollars worth of bitcoin, and the price of a bitcoin in US dollars is over ten times what it was in January.
“although it could become a scam.”
How?
My reference to Gresham’s Law was prompted by Mr Perry’s statement that he would accept contributions in precious metals.
In fact, people hoard precious metals, and contribute fiat money, in line with Gresham’s law. Mr Perry’s response was that contributions would be turned into cash – not that he realizes that offering to accept contributions in precious metals is totally symbolic.
Gresham’s law does not really apply to bitcoin, which is so far little more than a curiosity, although it could become a scam.
I am presuming nothing, and your sentence as to what I supposedly presume makes no sense.
RS@12; “I guess Mr. Berkman thinks that if someone doesn’t share his view of what constitutes good money they can’t know what Gresham’s law is?
You are presuming that simply because the gov’t doesn’t trade in Bitcom, DOESN’T infer that it is in someway undervalued. There is a limit even to the government’s stupidity!
“I think his intentions are the opposite of your hypothetical.”
That’s possible, but then why not take all the other contribution forms he is rejecting?
RS @ 4,
“he’s making a mistake if he thinks that the FEC will allow him to accept theoretically unlimited in kind donations without filing. If anything, the uncertainty over the value of those in kind donations seems more likely to trigger FEC action sooner.”
I think his intentions are the opposite of your hypothetical.
GB @ 2,
Whether or not Bitcoin will last as a medium of exchange (as opposed to mostly a toy for short-term speculators) remains to be seen.
It solves some important problems, and it has problems of its own. If it fails, presumably its solutions will be copied and its problems solved in future competing currencies.
I guess Mr. Berkman thinks that if someone doesn’t share his view of what constitutes good money they can’t know what Gresham’s law is?
I know exactly what Gresham’s Law is.
Gresham’s law is an economic principle that states: “When a government overvalues one type of money and undervalues another, the undervalued money will leave the country or disappear from circulation into hoards, while the overvalued money will flood into circulation.” It is commonly stated as: “Bad money drives out good”.
What makes you think he doesn’t know what it is?
Not sure I would want to back a candidate who does not know what Gresham’s Law is.
@5 Of course it wasn’t necessary, it was for publicity.
Good luck, Darryl. You have three more years to get the good word out.
@2 – if bitcoin or precious metal need to be converted to cash for expense purposes, those transactions will be made
Mr. Perry;
It REALLY wasn’t necessary to send that notice to
the Federal Elections Commission. They have NO
authority on your planet!
“As for bitcoin, it is a gimmick, and hardly even fiat money so far. Few potential vendors will accept bitcoin”
More and more vendors are accepting it all the time.
I do think he is making a mistake in not accepting contributions in every possible form, though.
And, he’s making a mistake if he thinks that the FEC will allow him to accept theoretically unlimited in kind donations without filing. If anything, the uncertainty over the value of those in kind donations seems more likely to trigger FEC action sooner.
Will he accept donations in….. tin?
Gresham’s Law will insure that Mr Perry does not get any contributions in precious metals.
As for bitcoin, it is a gimmick, and hardly even fiat money so far. Few potential vendors will accept bitcoin, and this whole posting just shows how pointless Mr Perry’s campaign is likely to be.
“The Darryl W. Perry for President (2016) campaign will not be accepting donations in currencies recognized by the federal legal tender laws, instead the campaign will only accept Bitcoin, Litecoin and precious metals. The campaign will not accept any donations via cash, credit/debit card, check or money order.”
This is a nice symbolic gesture, but realistically speaking, I think that this will probably have the effect of his campaign not being able to raise anywhere close to mount a serious run for President (even by Libertarian Party standards).