Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Amendment Petition Money Out of Politics Amendment

Posted 1 year ago on Oct. 8, 2012, 3:34 a.m. EST by gsw (2697)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Sign the Petition: Leave Comments For Draft Ideas

over 277,962 supporters

http://getmoneyout.com/

Post Comments on Amendment Drafts

Please leave your comments for debate on the following amendment drafts.

From our former Washington Lobbyist, Jimmy Williams, here is a DRAFT of our Constitutional Amendment for public debate this fall:

“No person, corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, campaign contributions to candidates for Federal office shall not constitute speech of any kind as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution or any amendment to the U. S. Constitution. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purposes of voting for candidates for Federal office.”

Here is Lawrence Lessig’s DRAFT of the amendment.

“No non-citizen shall contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidate for Federal office. United States citizens shall be free to contribute no more than the equivalent of $100 to any federal candidate during any election cycle. Notwithstanding the limits construed to be part of the First Amendment, Congress shall have the power to limit, but not ban, independent political expenditures, so long as such limits are content and viewpoint neutral. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purposes of voting for candidates for Federal office.”

BONUS: View Dylan Ratigan Rant against corporate duopoly: http://www.inquisitr.com/133805/ratigan-rant-goes-viral-as-dylan-ratigan-melts-down-on-air-video/

7 Comments

7 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 1 year ago

This is a good start. OWS supporter gsw is right on for getting behind this.

One goal is to rescind the "money = free speech" legislation and we would do well to keep that separate from the larger issue of "campaign contributions" or it will get lost in the quagmire.

I suggest we argue that "money = free speech" is morally wrong, and perhaps unconstitutional because "those who have more money would have more free speech", and that negates equality, equal rights, and the idea that we are all born equal [or at least it is a principle we want to work towards]

If we all have equal rights, and we all have one vote and each vote carries the same weight, then "money can only be free speech" if everyone has the same amount of money!!

[-] 1 points by gsw (2697) 1 year ago

Yes: a few have vast amounts of more money, and more speech, and less for the rest have relatively little.

Here's a post that scratches the surface :

http://occupywallst.org/forum/biil-moyers-exposes-c4-tax-free-unlimited-anonymou/

http://www.thenation.com/article/169641/secret-election-money-unleashed#

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5784) 1 year ago

6.The provision of Patriot Dollars to voters for the sole funding of political campaigns at all levels of government shall be enacted to keep political campaigns free from the undemocratic influences of monied interests that shall be prohibited from funding any political advertisements outside of political campaigns.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/

We can petition and hope for change or we can create the conditions http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-template/ to demand change.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

This is what OWS should be working on - not dreams

and the only way to get this done is to vote out the people in the house & senate who oppose an amendment

OUR OWS working group has been working on this for a year:

We can do what 80% of Americans say they want
We can do what 1,900,000 Americans signed
We can do what 363 local & state resolutions call for
We can do what 1,309 American mayors endorsed


Virtually every OWS goal –
jobs, taxes, government honesty, energy, environment, economy
all go back to EXACTLY one place
MONEY IN POLITICS

And there is EXACTLY one first step:

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

A constitutional amendment to
Overturn Citizens United and Corporate Personhood

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

▬► http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com ◄▬

╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬═╬

For a complete analysis of the amendment issue,

and the text of all amendments,
and our comparison of all of the amendments,
and the Citizens United case transcript,
and the Citizens United decision,
and the Buckley decision,
and analysis of corporate personhood,
and analysis of Article III,
and the ABC News poll on CU / CP,
and the PFAW poll on CU / CP,
and 70+ videos on CU / CP from

Chomsky, Hedges, Witchcraft, Reich,
Warren, Lessig, Hartmann, Maher, Sanders, Hightower, etc.

and our voting bloc petition & plan.

http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com
no password or signup

JOIN our OWS Working Group:
http://nycga.net/groups/restore-democracy

REGULAR MEETINGS:
Wednesdays 5:30-7:30PM @ 60 Wall St – The Atrium

[-] 1 points by gsw (2697) 1 year ago

Is this still active?

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Ratigan's rant is mostly fair - but it is OLD news
We have been trying - for a year -
I have been trying to get OWSers to concentrate on this -
rather than visions & goals & alternate currency etc

If every OWSer, a year ago,
got just one person per week to vote for people this November
and they each
got just one person per week to vote for people this November
who support an amendment - we would get one.


is this MY incompetence ? probably
or was OWS dominated by dreamers ? probably


they have the money - and they used it
we have the votes - and we are spewing D = R


WAKE THE FUCK UP !

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28436) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

It is time and long past time for the people to take up the roll of leadership.

Dealing with issues.