Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The one demand we all agree on

Posted 3 years ago on Nov. 19, 2011, 4:25 p.m. EST by unimportant (716)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Get money out of politics. To this end, here is a proposed bill to do that.

112th CONGRESS 1st SESSION

H. J. RES. ___

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to clarify the authority of Congress and the States to regulate corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

The CITIZENS of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, through __ introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on ____


JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to clarify the authority of Congress and the States to regulate corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state and to expressly exclude corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state from the rights given to natural persons by the Constitution of the United States, prohibit corporate spending in all elections, and affirm the authority of Congress and the States to regulate corporations and to regulate and set limits on all election contributions and expenditures.


Resolved by the CITIZENS of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and presented to the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within twelve [12] months after the date of its submission for ratification:

“ARTICLE—

“SECTION 1. We the people who ordain and establish the rights protected by the Constitution of the United States to be the rights of natural persons and do not extend to corporations, limited liability companies, or other private entities established for business purposes or to promote business interests under the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.

“SECTION 2. The words people, person, or citizen as used in this Constitution do not include corporations, limited liability companies and other private entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state.

“SECTION 3. Such corporations, limited liability companies and other private entities established under law are subject to regulation by the people through the legislative process, through their elected State and Federal representatives so long as such regulations are consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution and do not limit the freedom of the press.

“SECTION 4. Such corporations, limited liability companies and other private entities shall be prohibited from making contributions or expenditures to any candidate for public office or publicly elected official, any legislation before the Congress, the Senate or the people.

“SECTION 5. Congress and the States shall have the power to regulate and set limits on all election contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own spending, and to authorize the establishment of political committees to receive, spend, and publicly disclose the sources of those contributions and expenditures.

“SECTION 6. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people’s rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, freedom of association and all such other rights of the people, which rights are inalienable.”.

15 Comments

15 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by flang23 (47) 3 years ago

Looks good to me. Nice work.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 3 years ago

We are discussing action to force it through those that will not wish to pass it right now. We are discussing a massive letter writing campaign to begin with and then boycotts, strikes for Good Friday and Christmas and then a "union" with the Unions for a national strike and boycott and finally a vote of no-confidence or recall the legislators should our legislators attempt to water it down or fail to pass the bill.

Thoughts on this are important if anybody has some.

[-] 2 points by AnonymousAlaskan (5) 3 years ago

This sounds good, I think most people could get behind this. Some people in our group have been pushing for our local senators to promote this, but Murkowski doesn't support it. We're planning on mobbing down to her office in a large group and waiting in the lobby until her aide hears from every one of us.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 3 years ago

Remember her husband and the now infamous murko gram for spam :-) She did kick ass getting elected though without support of any party.

[-] 2 points by Silica (51) from Suisun City, CA 3 years ago

While I'm not familiar with what constitutes good language for bills, it seems to cover the important points. Is this of your making? Is there anywhere one could go to express support of this (proposed) bill?

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 3 years ago

Two Congressmen drafted two bills, both fell short of fixing and reversing the problem I combined the two bills so that they addressed the problem and reversed the problem. I posted the entire bill here:

http://www.nycga.net/groups/political-and-electoral-reform/docs/amendment-28-to-the-constitution-of-the-united-states-of-america

You can tweet, facebook or whatever. I don't use these things so I won't be doing that.

The original bills were from

Congressman McGovern

http://mcgovern.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=15&sectiontree=168,15&itemid=579

Congressman Deutch

http://deutch.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=269672

[-] 2 points by Silica (51) from Suisun City, CA 3 years ago

Many thanks! I'll be reviewing these in my spare time over the next few days. I'll see about spreading it around on Facebook.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 3 years ago

The language is solid and effective. Thank you for your support and post any questions you have and I will answer them if I am able.

[-] 1 points by Cocreator (306) 3 years ago

I second..

[-] 1 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 3 years ago

Sounds good to me. Nice job.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 3 years ago

I cannot stress this enough. This bill is good, it does what we want and it needs to be distributed and posted in the various Occupy sites and sent to the GA's for consideration for consensus.

Only with great numbers can we force an unwilling congress and senate to act on our behalf.

[-] 0 points by mikedenis (49) 3 years ago

boycott Wal-Mart

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by MBJ (96) 3 years ago

ows wants only to stir violence. You're being fooled if you think it's about reform. It's about chaos. Wise up.

[-] 1 points by Cocreator (306) 3 years ago

wrong,you are talking about yourself again..or is it to yourself again?

[-] 0 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 3 years ago

Bullshit. Many OWSers don't agree on any demand. Some take the view that any demand is too small. Others take the view that making demands puts our happiness in somebody else's hands. We either believe in what the slogan above says or not. We are either for world revolution or not. The notion of revolution is either genuine or it is hyperbole. If it is hyperbole then the first job is to dispense with it. If it is serious then even a Constitutional Amendment is insufficient. Do we really want to change the world or just patch it up a bit? Will patching it up a bit work or is it, in the phrase of sociologist C. Wright Mills, crackpot realism.