All of them have only to pander to one group and one group only. The people that elected them and sent them as delegates of their home state and home state citizens and beyond that the people o the entire country and the state and national constitutions - and no one, nothing else. If their loyalties lie elsewhere ....enemies domestic is the prhase to use.

Brings me back to the cleaning up the voting system and the dirty money involved.

The rule should be. If one may not vote one may not contribute. Foreign Governments and businesses, businesses including unions, and all other special interest groups may not vote. And that include laundered taxes through the Davis Bacon Act turned into union PAC contributions. Geographically If one may not vote in another precinct, district, city, county state or in two cases the country they may not contribute outside of their own area unless it's a specific campaign which is included on their precinct ballot and in their precinct they or it may not contribute. Funds contributed must be marked for and spent only within that same geo-political area. As for how it's spent it may bve spent only on campaigning that does not reach outside those geo-political limits. Which means it may be spent if marked for the national campaign of two positions only. At the State level which includes delegates to the national government the same limits of contribution and spending. At the county, city, district and precinct level - the same. Effectively solving the barrage of crap and forcing the campaign itself to clean up it's act. Free speech is not denied but vote buying is stopped cold in it's tracks George Soros or Ray Koch for two disparate examples may only contribute to the limits of their own precinct voters pamphlet and ballot. UAW and NEA the same. Ford Motor Company and Microsoft the same except the corporations and the unions cannot vote. Therefore they cannot contribute. Their interest can be served by in house meetings or in preceinct, district, county, city, or state events. with speakers, debaters, etc. but limited to the issue or candidate at the particular level. This is important. There is only the limits of the First Amendment to protect free speech but the abilit to buy votes hits on four or five parts of the constitution and those rights cannot be legally attacked in the name of free speech. So one may not say I have the right without exception to all of your rights without explanation.or reverse the two words. Enough for now to a constitutionalist the rest is self-explanatory. Money may not be used to enslave thought especially by non elected non voting entitites.