Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Let's ban super-big money from US elections - constitutional amendment

Posted 2 years ago on March 4, 2012, 5:30 p.m. EST by occupyonevoice (3)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

We call on the US Congress and President to craft a constitutional amendment of appropriate scope, which balances the people's right to free speech with the right of the people to a system of elections which is fair, and not unduly influenced by a select few super-rich citizens. In response to the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling which overturned most government restrictions on political spending, we demand a constitutional amendment which will limit super-big money in politics. The current state of affairs, in which a small number of super wealthy people have a huge sway over the election of our politicians, does not serve the people well. Sign our full petition if you agree!

https://www.change.org/petitions/us-congress-bar-super-big-money-in-politics-pass-a-constitutional-amendment

14 Comments

14 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

And while you're at it, some amendment language for your reading and petitioning pleasure:

https://www.change.org/petitions/pass-the-human-rights-amendment

[-] 2 points by occupyonevoice (3) 2 years ago

Thank you, I like.

[-] 3 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Thank you.

[-] 2 points by SmeggitySpooge (78) 2 years ago

Which one do you want to amend?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxYDnYgQ5MQ

Maybe you should ask Obama which one he thinks should be amended.

[-] 1 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Which what?

[-] 0 points by occupyonevoice (3) 2 years ago

I am proposing an new amendment to the constitution. I am flexible on what that will look like, but I think that the best way is to explicitly provide for public financing of elections: for example, perhaps, $4m for Senate races, $1.5m for primaries. Other offices will have proportionally different budgets, depending on the importance of the office.

[-] 2 points by SmeggitySpooge (78) 2 years ago

So you did not watch the video of Obama discussing the ConstitutionS, did you?

[-] 0 points by occupyonevoice (3) 2 years ago

I have listened to the video, and I acknowledge Obama's point. Yet, at the same time, money is a corrupting influence on politics, and it is our obligation to try an mitigate its influence on our representatives. I therefore respectfully request your support, and together we can build the kind of grassroots movement which can change the national agenda.

[-] 2 points by SmeggitySpooge (78) 2 years ago

Then I ask you again, which Constitution do you want to amend?

You can't touch the corporate one and the original one still exists with all the lights on, there's just nobody home.

Listen to it again, the first five seconds, over and over.

If you dig carefully through the archived internet, you may actually stumble across more of Obama on this very subject. I find it interesting that this one remains as others have been vaporized.

[-] 1 points by occupyonevoice (3) 2 years ago

To be clear, I wish to introduce a new amendment to the US Constitution. This amendment must effectively restrict super-big money from politics, and provide for public funding of elections.

See the video on this website: http://www.dylanratigan.com/2011/08/19/our-constitutional-amendment-get-money-out-of-politics/

I do not hereby endorse this idea in total, but the speaker makes some good points.

[-] 1 points by SmeggitySpooge (78) 2 years ago

However, don't you think re-instating the "original one" with a slight bit of attention to "emollients" would be far better than wasting time bandaid-ing the corrupt mechanism?

Do you know what would have to take place in order to do so and who would become provoked enough to bring world war?

http://www.barefootsworld.net/index.html

You may or may not enjoy poking about the information found at the above link.

Thanks for giving a shit enough to at least be stabbing in the right direction.

[-] 2 points by onepercentguy (294) 2 years ago

yeah, that'll work

[-] 0 points by occupyonevoice (3) 2 years ago

I believe that it will work; public opinion is strongly against the role of super-big money in elections, as evidenced by the strong backlash against the Citizen's United ruling by the Supreme Court.

[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

This should be on top of the page.