Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Thet first step to everything is a constitutional amendment

Posted 5 years ago on May 2, 2012, 10:21 a.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Virtually everything we want hinges on disarming our opponent –
by stopping the flood of bribes into our government.

Join the NYC OWS
Corporations are not People and Money is not Speech Working Group

This is the first REAL step to REAL change .

government OF the people BY the people FOR the people

Join the NYC OWS Corporations Are Not People and Money Is Not Speech Working Group
………….( even if you are not near NYC )


check out our comprehensive analysis of
the 17 existing proposed amendments
and our detailed historical timeline of corporate personhood

We can continue,

as a movement of demands
as a movement of declarations
as a movement of marches


Are you ready
.....................FOR ACTION ?
Are you ready
.....................TO DO SOMETHING REAL ?
Are you ready
......................TO JOIN 83% OF YOUR FELLOW AMERICANS ?

We must not
DEMAND that we WANT THEM.to give to US
We must

Because of the Supreme Court's decision,
we cannot accomplish anything significant, without FIRST -

Overturning Citizens United !!!
Ending Corporate Personhood !!!

83% of Americans already agree on it
as stated in the ABC/Washington Post poll


In the the PFAW Poll -

85% of voters say that corporations have too much influence over the political system today.
77% think Congress should support an amendment to limit the amount corporations can spend on elections.
74% say that they would be more likely to vote for a candidate for Congress who pledged to support a Constitutional Amendment limiting corporate spending in elections.


Section 1 {A corporation is not a person and can be regulated}
The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons { human beings } only. Artificial entities, such as corporations, limited liability companies, and other entities, established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or local law. The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the People, through Federal, State, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.

Section 2 { Money is not speech }
Federal, State and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own contributions and expenditures, and may restrict all financing to “public financing” for the purpose of influencing in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure. As above, all foreign contributions are forbidden.

Section 3 { Transparency & Disclosure }
Federal, State and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed less than 60 days after the transaction and before the election.

Section 4 { Voter Suppression }
Federal, State and local government shall not require any new forms of id for voting, beyond what was needed to register for previously registered voters. College photo-id ( including for out-of-state students ) must be acceptable. Federal, State and local government shall permit early voting for at least the 6 days before the election day.

Section 5 { Election Day & Registration }
Federal, State and local government may make election day a holiday. Federal, State and local government must allow simultaneous registration and voting on election day.

Section 6 { Eliminate the Electoral College – one man one vote } The electoral college is abolished and the President and Vice-President will be elected by popular vote. .

Section 7 { Eliminate the Filibuster } Unless specified in the Constitution , all voting in the House and Senate shall be based on a simple majority.

Section 8 Nothing contained in this amendment shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press .

{NOTE: sections 4, 5, 6, 7 are not required to overturn CU – just my wish list }


Our primary goal should be to pass a constitutional amendment to counter Supreme Court decision Citizens United (2010) , that enables unlimited amounts of anonymous money to flood into our political system.
We don’t have to explain or persuade people to accept our position – we only have to persuade them to ACT based on their own position. Pursuing this goal will prove to the world that we, at OWS, are a serious realistic Movement, with serious realistic goals. Achieving this goal will make virtually every other goal – jobs, taxes, infrastructure, Medicare – much easier to achieve –
by disarming our greatest enemy – GREED.


THE SUCCESS STORY OF THE AMENDING PROCESS The Prohibition movement started as a disjointed effort by conservative teetotalers who thought the consumption of alcohol was immoral. They ransacked saloons and garnered press coverage here and there for a few years. Then they began to gain support from the liberals because many considered alcohol partially responsible for spousal and child abuse, among other social ills. This odd alliance, after many years of failing to influence change consistently across jurisdictions, decided to concentrate on one issue nationally—a constitutional amendment. They pressured all politicians on every level to sign a pledge to support the amendment. Any who did not, they defeated easily at the ballot box since they controlled a huge number of liberal, and conservative and independent swing votes in every election. By being a single-issue constituency attacking from all sides of the political spectrum, they very quickly amassed enough votes (2/3) to pass the amendment in Congress. And, within just 17 months, they were successful in getting ¾ of the state legislatures to ratify the constitutional amendment into law. (Others were ratified even faster: Eight —took less than a year. The 26th, granting 18-year-olds the right to vote, took just three months and eight days.)

If they could tie the left and right into a success - WHY CAN'T WE ??????????


83% of Americans ( and 76% of the Rs ) have already opposed CU in
the ABC/Washington post poll and the above
We don’t have to work to convince people on the validity of our position.
This Amendment { sections 1+2 }is REQUIRED to overturn CU.
And all other electoral reform can be passed through the normal legislative process. 4
OWS and the FORUM pages are chock full of ( mostly ) excellent ideas to improve our country.
All of them have strong advocates – and some have strong opposition.
None of them has been “pre-approved” by 83% of Americans !
Pursuing this goal – is exactly what Americans want.
What do we want? Look at that almost endless list of demands – goals - aims.
Tax the rich. End the Fed. Jobs for all, Medicare for all. So easy to state our demands! Can you imagine how hard it would be to formulate a “sales pitch” for any of these to convince your Republican friends to vote for any of them?
83% of Americans have ALREADY “voted” against CU. And 76% of the Rs did too.
All we have to do ask Americans is to pressure their representatives – by letters - emails – petitions.

Wanna take your family on vacation?
Convince the 7 year old and the 10 year old to go to Mt Rushmore.
Then try to convince them to go to Disneyland.
Prioritizing this goal will introduce us to the world – not as a bunch of hippie radical anarchist socialist commie rabblerousers – but as a responsible, mature movement that is fighting for what America wants.


I feel that using the tactics of the NRA, the AARP, the TP, the anti-SOPA – who all represent a minority – who have successfully used their voting power and political pressure to achieve their minority goals - plus the Prohibition Amendment tactics – bringing all sides together - is a straight path for us to success that cannot fail to enable us to create and complete one task that the MAJORITY want.

There are at least seventeen different Constitutional Amendments in the works.
Help us support these moves to get the money out of our political system.

Join the NYC OWS Corporations are not People and Money is not Speech Working Group

regular meetings Wednesdays 5:30-7:30PM @ 60 Wall St – The Attrium

..███░░ .░███░..░███. ░█░░░█░░.░░.████░░███░░░



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by freewriterguy (882) 5 years ago

[Section 9] The department of motor vehicles shall be limited to what it can charge U.S. citizens, to $10 per car, and $10 per person for drivers license. If need be, the DMV's may sell their buildings and use these proceeds to purchase white government trailers to operate out of. We citizens are acceptable to stand outside, and need not pay for an air conditioned room to facilitate our motor vehicle registration.

[Section 10] Small business's shall not be required to file an income tax until 5 years after they start up, or and additional 1 year after they have made a profit. The government will be satisfied with the small business owners statement of profitability as sole discretion, and no investigation shall be authorized of a small business as they are run by free men who are busy trying to create jobs.

[Section 11] All homeowners shall be entitled to one land patent on a home they occupy so that not bank, or corporation or government agency may ever foreclose on their property on that Land Patent. Those citizens who own more than one home shall be forced to offer its renters a rent to own contract, whereby they own the home and all entitlements beginning with the first month of rent payment. Once a renter has made 7 years of payments, their are immediately issued a Land Patent on their home which they forever own as the property is passed down to their heirs, tax free.

[Section 12] When a person wins a lottery or comes inherits land or money, no tax shall be applied to either the inheritance or the lottery winner. Also, gift tax shall be immediately abolished, so as when a lottery winner gives money to others, he is no longer penalized by the government.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

While I respect your opinion, it is imperative that we support
an amendment that has minimal opposition. And an amendment that contains things that CANNOT be passed by ordinary legislation.

That is why we center on corporate personhood and the two SCOTUS decisions ONLY

[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 5 years ago

i.e. let us continue in our enslavenment, as we chop down the giant redwoods that is our government with our little axe, and expect progress to come sometime over the next millenium. Let us also remain ignorant to plato's words, "only the dead have seen an end to war". To that I would say, if only the man who supposes himself to be over me would step down, and go his way, and live his life, as I a free man desire to live mine, he need not see my axe. For I live by the law of God, and need not the law of man in his ignorance.

I think im expressing my great disbelief here, as I have been stepped on so many times by the government, and it didnt seem anything I could do, as none of my attempts to complain were ever addressed.

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 5 years ago

These two parties were corrupted long before CU came around.

I agree an amendment is needed, problem is neither party will do it.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

over a dozen amendments are already IN the house & senate- all proposed by party members ( except one by {I} Bernie Sanders )

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 5 years ago

There have been plenty of bills of all sorts of good stuff constantly, over the last 30 years, but none ever get passed. Tehre were a couple of Tea people in Florida that created a public funding of elections bill a couple years ago, they pretty much got laughed at.

[-] 0 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

While none of these may pass, they have been proposed by Democrats & Republicans and include some very senior members

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 5 years ago

And they will ALL get shot down, because the same people at the top are still running the parties.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 5 years ago

There have been plenty of bills of all sorts of good stuff constantly, over the last 30 years, but none ever get passed. Tehre were a couple of Tea people in Florida that created a public funding of elections bill a couple years ago, they pretty much got laughed at.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

public funding can pass but even if it does, it CANNOT exclude superpacs and $50,000,000 from the koch brothers drowning any public financed candidate - unless we get the amendment passed -
that launches e verything else

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 5 years ago

IF the people are too stupid to research themselves, and only go off of TV commericals, then in a way we are getting what we deserve

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

The koch brothers are getting what they paid for. so is grover.

[-] 2 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 5 years ago

I like this premise.

[-] 1 points by dragon13 (12) 5 years ago

All of this. I'd add:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Opportunity_to_Govern_Amendment Allowing naturalized citizens who have been Americans for 20+ years to run for the presidency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Apportionment_Amendment Makes Congress much larger, therefore allowing for more realistic representation of such a large and diverse nation. In combination with other amendments dealing with corruption and the influence of corporations in politics, as well as term limits, this would make Congress more representative of the voices of the American people.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

There are plenty of ideas on what to change. The problem is those ideas require the very source of the corruption they're against to be in compliance with them. You can't rely upon politicians to pass legislation against their own interests and you can't rely upon voters to vote any differently than they ever have (or else they would have done it already). Repression is not simple, it requires strategy to keep people from rebelling when they're lied to about being free. Victory against repression is no different. It requires strategy. The first thing to do is to remove the dependency on weakness; namely reliance on politicians and the people who vote for them. Such reliance obviously doesn't work. That leaves the only thing that can work on a limited scale; ballot initiatives.

What cannot be obtained at the national level through politicians can be obtained at the state level through the people of the 24 ballot initiative states. Once that is accomplished and the results of that accomplishment can be seen to make a positive difference, political momentum will exist for supporting national ratification of the new voter enacted state amendments.

The important aspect of this course of action is the national dichotomy to arise from the 24 'free' states exercising their freedom to make a difference in their own lives and the 26 'unfree' states being prohibited from doing so. This act in itself would cause an undeniable national awareness of just how 'unfree' Americans truly are and how opposed to their freedom the corporations and politicians truly are when Americans begin demanding the freedom to engage in initiatives to determine their own fate. It's at that point that a political critical mass for change can occur.

And there is where the battle finally begins. http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/

[-] 1 points by writerconsidered123 (344) 5 years ago

ok this is much more detailed then my post but it's the same thing I think OWS should focus on this one issue and run it

[-] 1 points by rosy1rosy (2) from Secaucus, NJ 5 years ago

in australia, people are fined for not voting. if people were fined $100.00 for not voting, you you would see much higher participation

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

In Australia, there is no bill of rights. In the U.S., the first amendment of the bill of rights prohibits congress from abridging the freedom of speech. This means that one cannot be legally compelled or prohibited from engaging in a legal act of speech such as voting and therefore cannot be penalized for exercising the freedom of choice of when or when not to vote.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

there are many interesting, useful ideas on this web site
the REAL KEY is the already existing 80%+ support for this amendment!

Wanna take your family on vacation? Convince the 7 year old and the 10 year old to go to Mt Rushmore. Then try to convince them to go to Disneyland. Prioritizing this goal will introduce us to the world – not as a bunch of hippie radical anarchist socialist commie rabblerousers – but as a responsible, mature movement that is fighting for what America wants.


[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

An 80% polled is not an 80% of voters. If that support truly exists nationwide, it will be reflected in the signatures gathered in each ballot initiative state to have the amendment enacted at the state level (as is already happening). Push to pass the amendment at the state level and to begin the ratification process from voter political pressure in those states. Afterall, if it's the people who get the amendment passed, there can't be any doubt from their state legislatures and congressional representatives that this is what they truly want. Anyone who doesn't vote in support of national ratification will be putting their political career in jeopardy.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

hese days, it often seems that Americans don't have much to agree about. But when it comes to what democracy is (and isn’t), it turns out we’re on the same page.

One year ago today, the Supreme Court handed down what may be its most significant decision in a generation. Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission found that corporations have a First Amendment right to spend unlimited (and unreported) amounts of money to influence the outcome of elections. Regardless of where we fall on the political spectrum, we’re affronted by the idea that political influence can be so brazenly bought.

It didn’t take long for the impact of the decision to become apparent. In November's midterm elections, according to a report by Public Citizen, the amount of money spent by outside groups (i.e. not candidates or political parties) was 384 percent higher than in the midterms of 2006. About half of that money was untraceable, funneled through front groups that were not required to disclose where the money they spent (mostly on negative attack ads) came from.

It’s not hard to understand why this is so bad for our democracy. Poll after poll has shown that Americans oppose Citizens United by about 4 to 1. A new poll by Hart Research Associates [pdf] found that 82 percent of voters believe Congress should limit the amount of money corporations can spent on elections; 77 percent of voters believe that corporations have more control of our political system than average citizens do. An August poll sponsored by MoveOn.org found that 77 percent of people believe that corporate election spending represents “an attempt to bribe politicians” (compared to just 19 percent that bought the counterargument, that election spending is simply “a form of free speech.”)

Polls also show that this issue inspires not just disapproval, but a desire for serious action. The Hart survey found broad, bipartisan support for the notion of amending the U.S. Constitution to affirm that corporations don’t have the same rights as people, effectively overturning Citizens United. Eighty-seven percent of Democrats, 82 percent of Independents, and 68 percent of Republicans said they would support such an amendment.

(Though reform groups are working to counter the decision in a number of ways, such as by promoting public financing of elections, the need for shareholder approval of election spending, and a prohibition on political contributions by government contractors, a constitutional amendment is widely considered the best way to fully neutralize the ruling.)

Of course, a favorable public opinion poll is not the same as a vibrant movement to make the amendment a reality. As encouraging as these numbers are, what they don’t indicate is broad awareness of the issue. Only 22 percent of the people that Hart polled had actually heard of Citizens United before taking the survey; the rest based their opinion on a brief description of the court decision and proposed amendment.

BP oil spill, photo by DigitalGlobe-ImageryA Crisis of Democracy Riki Ott: For Gulf residents, the BP oil spill has made the problem of unchecked corporate power painfully clear.

Clearly, there’s a lot of work yet to be done. Widespread belief in the need to keep corporations out of politics isn’t much without widespread awareness of how deeply entrenched corporate power already is.

But what’s amazing is how much potential energy there is around this issue (remember that science class drawing of a boulder on top of a hill?). When people learn about Citizens United, it produces strong reactions. Regardless of where we fall on the political spectrum, we’re affronted by the idea that political influence can be so brazenly bought.

What all the polls tell us is that we have more in common than we often admit. Americans are increasingly reporting feeling marginalized by our own political system. That emotion is manifesting in very different ways, from Tea Party anger at government to progressive disgust with corporations. But what we all seem to share is a very fundamental expectation of what democracy should be—and an awareness that this isn’t it.

We agree on what’s wrong; we even agree on how to fix it. What we need now is to believe we can. As Public Citizen president Robert Weissman noted on a conference call about strategies for passing a Constitutional amendment, “The biggest obstacle we face is convincing people it’s achievable.”

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 years ago

graph labels are unclear

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

red bars= favor an amendment blue bars= against amendment

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 years ago

bottom axes labels?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

democrat independent republican

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 5 years ago

You are right that we need a constitutional amendment but the one we need is for term limits for our representatives and our senators. We have congressman/women who have made a career on corruption. They suck the money in from Wall Street and lobbyists for their own political advancement and power and wealth. They make the laws that keep the corruption going such as repealing the Banking Act in 1999 that separated investment banking from deposit banking and started this financial mess. They line their pockets while saying they have our best interest at heart when in fact it's just a ruse to keep getting re-elected by people that don't pay attention and believe them. People may go in to politics with the best of intentions, but end up getting corrupted by the power they eventually get. We need to make the congress OF the people with citizens and not career politicians. Let's force our legislators to enact term limits on congress.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

If you term limit a senator to two terms, say 12 years - working for Pharma
then he takes a Pharm job at $1,000,000/year It is not the people who are corrupt - it is the money
end corporate personhood & citizens unite and you can get rid on mo ny going to pols before during and after they are elected

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 5 years ago

No...The people are corrupt BECAUSE of the money. You bring up a good point that I was trying to make but the answer is to outlaw lobbying altogether and make it illegal for a former congressman to become a lobbyist. Many of us have been fighting to get rid of lobbyists altogether but until we get rid of the people already there who refuse to give up the power they have to keep their money flow in place, we won't change anything. And when we do get rid of the career politicians, we must hold the new representative's feet to the fire to get these things done or get rid of them in their next election.

[-] 1 points by JPMcMahon (18) 5 years ago

Single, The Commonwealth of Virginia is the only state that has a one term governor, and the legislature only meets for 2 months out of the year. Notice that they also don't have the chronic budget shortfalls that plague other populous states. So I agree with term limits. But you ain't gonna "force" shit. Getting a Constitutional amendment requires the acquiescence of two thirds of the state legislatures, and street protests are not going to do the job. People are going to have to organize, and that means using real names, background checks, a rigid hierarchy, with executives, lobbyists, and paid staffers. People are going to have to wear jackets and neckties, listen to and follow directions, be polite, and compromise when needed. Madison Avenue will need to be included in the campaign. Only PERSUASION will work to get it done, and this website might be the wrong venue to get something like that going.

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 5 years ago

Actually, I think that we can impose our own term limits on these politicians. We don't need an amendment if enough people understand that we need to vote all the bums out that have been there more than 5 years. I think OWS and Tea Partiers can agree on this. We may support different people to elect to each office but we can agree to get who ever is there now out no matter the party.

[-] 1 points by JPMcMahon (18) 5 years ago

SV, The huge problem with "Throwing the bums out." is that most people, though they hate congress (incidentally, US Senators' terms are SIX years long), love their own representatives. In the house of representatives, it takes most reps a two year term to figure out what the hell they are doing. Most people, even thoughtful involved people, are not going to vote out an effective rep or senator who brings home the bacon in federal money to his/her district, has seniority and thus more power on committees, has effective constituent outreach, and has high name recognition. The candidate to run against someone like that and beat them would have to be just incredible. No one is going to vote against someone that they voted for earlier just to get rid of them on principle's sake, although the TP just gave Lugar the heave ho in Indiana because they did the stuff that I mentioned in my last post, and got organized. Constitutional amendment to limit terms, or nothing will ever change, sadly.

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 5 years ago

Things can change if we make them change. If there were such a thing as term limits, it would need to be 2 for Senate (12 years) and 4 for House (8 years). We will have to impose our own limits and it IS possible because everything is changing. Incumbency isn't necessarily a bonus anymore. Grassroots are working. The people have to make this happen but if every one thinks negatively that it can't happen then it won't. Isn't that why people are gathering is to change things. I'm just saying that the way to start is to throw out the people that are responsible for this mess and bring in fresh ideas.

It's a simple concept and even though difficult, it's easier to do than change the system as written.

[-] 0 points by JPMcMahon (18) 5 years ago

SV, Thanks for such a thoughtful reply. But the reality is, there is only one group of people who would completely believe in this change in the way things are done, are willing to work hard and get organized, and have a proven track record of getting shit done; the Tea Party. OWS? They have "raised consciousness?" Big fucking deal. They have no lever on the power to get anything done. Make a deal with the devil if you really believe that term limits are important to making things work better.

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 5 years ago

Maybe I am making a deal with the devil but I'm trying to get some of his borderline followers to think logically for themselves and to help the rest of America as well as the tea party get rid of these crooks. I think it is actually something we can all agree on and work together on. Even though many people don't care to have a thoughtful conversation, I've found that there are some that do.

I would like to see as many career democrats get fired as career republicans. I'm an equal opportunity patriot. Even though what they may replace them with may be scary, at least it gives an opportunity to replace them and scare the hell out of those still there.

There are so many points that are impossible to discuss rationally because so many in this movement have been brainwashed to think that socialism is the way forward and are not open to other opinions but I thought that this particular problem would be something to engage them on, that there could be some agreement because this IS the reason we are in this mess. The most important point that I'm trying to make is to NOT change the core system we have but to change the people running the system so we can fix it.

Many of our youth don't understand how our system is supposed to work because it's been broken for so long and their education has been indoctrination to serve the people in power (this includes their college professors that benefit from the status quo also). It serves a better purpose to try to persuade those that are open to thinking for themselves to think logically and find simple solutions that can work. Rather than tackle all that I believe and get nowhere, I thought I would take a small approach in the only direction that I thought there could be agreement here. At least it could be a step in the right direction.

This is a small step but I thought it was one worth taking. I'm worried for this country and especially for the young who will be running it in a few years.If they continue to see socialism as the direction they want to go, we will lose more and more of our liberty and the government will be in control of every aspect of our lives. America will turn into something we no longer recognize as a free republic.

[-] 1 points by JPMcMahon (18) 5 years ago

SV, Our system and people have always been crazy enough to make interesting reading in a history book, but it has only been "broken" one time: 1861-1865

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

Given a few hours I could make a list of 100 similar changes -
all desirable - but not supported by the overwhelming majority of Americans -
if you passed an amendment ending citizens united + buckley + corporate personhood
campaign finance reform could be done & term limits would not be needed

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 5 years ago

Until we have term limits, we won't get anything worthwhile passed. Nothing will happen as long as we have the same politicians writing the rules to benefit them and their friends and lining their pockets. We wouldn't need term limits if people were enlightened enough to vote out these corrupt individuals but since that hasn't happened and most of our politicians have been in office for over 30 and 40 years because we, the citizens keep voting them back into power, nothing will change.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

80%+ Americans polled want an Amendment to restrict money in politics
What evidence of support is there for term limits?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 years ago

term limits are used rider ribbon to pass real legislation

corps got no executive term limits

so get field advantage each time the government has to change it's team

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 5 years ago

I support this amendment. The difficulty is getting politicians who benefit financially from the status quo to change it. Pressure from voters could achieve this but we are so apathetic that the turnout is kept low. I see there sections addressing voting and such. The best voting change would be compulsory voting. The 1% benefit most from the low turnout. Their fear was apparent as they watched this President campaign and win. All efforts at voter suppresion is evidence enough that we must get everyone to vote. It's good enough for Australia and it will allow for maximum pressure on our politicians. Please add that to your amendment.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

PLEASE join our working group - even if you are not near NY you can post your ideas Join the our NYC
Corporations are not People and Money is not Speech Working Group
………….( even if you are not near NYC )


regular meetings Wednesdays 5:30-7:30PM @ 60 Wall St – The Atrium

..███░░ ░███░..░███.░.█░░░█░░░░.████░.░███░░░

[-] 0 points by torusngamble (9) 5 years ago


Forget the Rigged Elections.

Forget Obama and Romney.

Forget the rest of the Democratic and Republican corporate puppets.

Forget the feel-good mental masturbation of Third Parties.

Our system is broken and cannot be repaired from within.