Agree in general. Ez fix: strings attached that it's anonymous and unattached. A third party manages the exchange, and everyone is under oath. A step in the right direction at least

Should it? I get that political parties should report donors - but for nonprofits and other institutions I feel it's not that necessary since they are directly investing that money in projects (that the donor may choose - but if that's not the case then that investment isn't happening) - for political parties and politicians it can be seen as a bribe as the things they invest in usually don't have a direct return of investment.

And there should be rules and regulations making sure that that donation is not ending up in some kind of contract for the company of the donor but that whatever that investment is funding has a transparent process

Where do we draw the line? Should donors to libraries be made public even if that person wants to remain anonymous but fund an expansion? Should donors to non-profits be made public?

Dafuq? If it's anonymous, how is it exerting influence?

So if I donate to someone it's "dark money"?