We should prgressively tax campaign spending, not subsidize it. Adding more money to politics is like trying to control a california wildfire by throwing gasoline on it.

I'd say a 10% tax on the first 10 million, and then a sliding scale with 50% paid on any dollar after 100 million is good. Under such laws, the 2004 presidential election would have put well over 250 million into into general fund, sparing taxpayers both the annoyance of political ad saturation, AND shifting the tax burden to idiots with nothing better to do with their money than subsidize lying.

That does sound like a much better idea. In practice, it is just like the luxury taxes in professional basketball and baseball. Whether you are talking about a rich New Yorker trying to pay a few hundred million for a World Series or several hundred million for a presidency, tax them and share some of that tax money with their competitors.

It would be an interesting question as to whether the courts would deem taxing of political spending as a hindrance to free speech. It would make the process more expensive and redistributive, but it wouldn't stop someone from going crazy with the spending if they really wanted to do so.