Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Taking the money out of politics.

Posted 2 years ago on Sept. 17, 2012, 11:20 p.m. EST by Orwellwuzright (-84) from Lockeford, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Here in California there is a proposition on the upcoming ballot that will severely restrict how much money unions can give to political candidates. The Koch brothers recently gave the pro side a shitload of money. Should it be supported?

7 Comments

7 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

It does not matter what is on the ballot
A union IS a corporation
A corporation IS a person
Constitutionally, all "people" have the same 1st amendment rights
therefore, unions have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to "speak" their money just like the kochs do


If you want to stop it ALL


Please comment on NYC OWS site:

http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com

A constitutional amendment to Overturn Citizens United and Corporate Personhood

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, Nader
Warren, Lessig, Hartmann, Maher, Kucinich 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 swkrwithnojob (7) from Hauppauge, NY 2 years ago

There should not be any PAC or personal money spent on political campaigns! If every American donated $1 on tax returns, and that pot is divided equally among all the candidates, then the candidates are all on equal footing to inform the public of their views and agendas.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

incumbent and the opposing republican or democrat party get more news coverage for free than all that is received for campaign spending

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Absolutely not. A union is not a person. Only people should contribute to political candidates.

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

You can write legislation, but that is less effective than removing the incentive.

The stakes are high because of the winner takes all system.

This has two effects:

  • Even though campaigning may only determine a few percent of the votes, the effects can be greatly magnified by the system.
  • No new parties will emerge that break the two party monopoly.

Look at Europe where this issue is less problematic.

[-] 1 points by fredgolder (4) 2 years ago

I say that if you're going to donate money to a public candidate then you should have to open your life up to the public that means all your financial records so that we know what you stand for what kind of person you are and what you have done in the past. How many people will continue to contribute if they are not on the level so to speak no one who is involved in questionable activities will be open to that kind of scrutiny if they want to stay in whatever business they are in

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

I am for removing all money. All of it.

That being said, we cannot start with either unions or corporations. It needs to be both. So no, I would not support this.