A couple of months ago, someone (unfortunately, I don’t recall the name or date) wrote to the New York Times, suggesting that all political contributions be made anonymously. Given the continuous contention that the issue of political contributions causes in the US, I was intrigued by the idea and have thought about it, off-and-on, since even though connected people snort derisively at the idea and I assume it has the political viability of the Caesar cipher at the NSA. Nevertheless, I wonder whether a suitable protocol has already been invented. Typically, a contributor would like to be able to confirm his donative status with a political party or candidate, as would the party or candidate for, their targeted mailings and such. Thus, any anonymous political contribution protocol would involve proofs of membership and share much with secure election protocols. However, these are not sufficient. It should be difficult for the recipient to discover the amount of the claimed contribution. The contributor might say to the recipient, I will contribute $100,000 to your campaign at exactly 2:03 PM USA PST. While a third party, that anonymizes the transfer of funds, would be involved, immediate tracking of the balance could reveal the identity of the contributor. Limited reporting of the current balance or, using MixMaster-like techniques to obfuscate fund transfers, may do for high traffic ($$$) recipients. Further, it ought to be be difficult for a contributor to collect proofs of contribution from other people that he has illicitly funded in the classical "Gore-Buddhist-Temple" attack (http://www.realchange.org/gore.htm#buddhist) to later present to the recipient. This seems hard and may justify a very low minimum contribution. While, "I am not a lawyer", I am certain that there are labyrinthian free speech issues involved in mandated anonymous political contributions. While the fact that we voted is recorded in the US, the side that we voted for is concealed (I hope so, having made no detailed examination of the internals of voting machines. Such is Trust.). Even though anonymous voluntary free speech is protected here, it is a thick slice between "I contributed" and "I contributed $100,000. Here is my receipt! Get the bedroom ready." Michael