Posted 1 year ago on Nov. 16, 2011, 6:02 p.m. EST by foxinsox60
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
There are two methods of amending the constitution. I suggest we look at the 2nd and entirely otherwise unused method to date as described in the constitution, article V. The second process describes there starts with the states. With the many OCCUPY camps across the country, we have enough numbers to make a sizable effect at the state level. Such an action would force, per the constitution, the federal government to take up this measure.
I propose an amendment #28, which would overturn the citizens united case and otherwise entirely limit campaign contributions. I'm not a lawyer but the language could be:
Part 1: No person, organization, or corporation other than the candidate may pay for an ad that is used to promote his/her campaign.
Part 2: Campaign contributions for all those running for senate, house, or president are limited to $100 per person, per election.
Part 3: No politician or his/her family can have any financial or other investments.
All parts are used to to stop politicians from receiving financial benefits from legislation. Specifically, the first part is to overturn the Citizen's United decision. The second is to limit campaign contributions to amount that is reasonable for almost everyone. And the third is to cut off any indirect opportunities for legislators to profit from their legislation.
What are your thoughts? Is this doable?