Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: How about a petition to outlaw campaign contribs over $100?

Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 21, 2011, 1:26 p.m. EST by number2 (914)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I don't know maybe it should be less. All you really need to be elected anymore is facebook and that is free. Maybe your own website for a few hundred. I don't see any good reason for the hundreds of millions being raised.

31 Comments

31 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by Bernie (117) 13 years ago

How about NO money from private sources. Only money from the Federal general fund can be used for federal elections. Any candidate for Federal office that takes private money or goods of any kind spends a year in jail. (No bail) We would actually have our Federal Representatives working for us full time, rather than them spending 80% of their time asking for handouts.

[-] 1 points by PlasmaStorm (242) 13 years ago

number2, I would encourage you to consider what may be a hole in your reasoning.

You plan to "take money out of politics," right? Well, how much money have the protesters spent in NYC? Think about it dude. They've spent thousands of dollars. Each.

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

Yeah I don't know I just shot that out there. I know what the problem is, but not yet how to solve it.

[-] 1 points by kestrel (274) 13 years ago

of course, if you don't actually track who is contributing then you have gained nothing. This was being suggested by the current administration because contributions that are under $100 don't have to be tracked, so you can give under $100 as many times as you want....

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

add that to the language in the petition.

[-] 1 points by monahan (272) 13 years ago

No good the unions buy all our politicians

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

yeah everybody with a little money does. Did you see microsoft was completely apolitical, then the government sued them. Ever since then they contribute to campaigns. Now the government is off their back. So even if you don't want to, they make you. If this was the only thing that came out of this movement, it would do alot of good.

[-] 1 points by monahan (272) 13 years ago

I have a meetup.com group called nomoneypolitics.com join it promote it.

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

sounds good. I will

[-] 1 points by monahan (272) 13 years ago

Thank you support the thread

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

try to keep this bumped too

[-] 1 points by monahan (272) 13 years ago

Ok sounds good I'm in favor of publicly funded campaigns this 100$ stuff is just propaganda of union leadership

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

You don't like the $100 figure. why not?

[-] 1 points by monahan (272) 13 years ago

Not all of America has it and it will create a snowball effect first one with 100$ wins

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

OK I was saying $100 maximum contribution. But now that is actually unaffordable for quite a few of us.

[-] 1 points by 8472ofborg (100) from Bruce, SD 13 years ago

I am trying to do something similar in petition form on the We the People website hosted by the white house. Here is the link.

http://wh.gov/2zR

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

I think what would be better is a massive OWS movement petition. Like the first thing to really hit the media, coming out of OWS, is this non-partisan petition. Any politician arguing against it wouldn't look good at all.

[-] 1 points by 8472ofborg (100) from Bruce, SD 13 years ago

I agree. I'll post an idea.

[-] 1 points by protest (43) 13 years ago
[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

can you explain what this is about?

[-] 1 points by protest (43) 13 years ago

This was a supreme court ruling that allows corporate money to flood campaigns. Corporations can flood the opponents campaign with money against a progressive, liberal candidate. (2010), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment prohibits government from censoring political broadcasts in candidate elections when those broadcasts are funded by corporations or unions.

[-] 1 points by 8472ofborg (100) from Bruce, SD 13 years ago

Haha, I am doing the same thing on the same site.

http://wh.gov/2zR