Forum Post: Why not a Third Party, that refuses to receive donations from corporations?
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 15, 2011, 10:05 a.m. EST by ThirdPartyNow
(6)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The Republican Party is sold out to the corporations.
The Democratic Party is sold out to the corporations.
We want laws that take the money out of politics. We want laws prohibiting donations from corporations to political parties and candidates.
But we know that we won't see laws like that being approved in the Congress anytime soon, at least not in the next few years.
So, we need to create a Third Party. We need a new party that refuses to receive donations from corporations. A party that only receives small donations from individuals.
I don't know what should be the name of the party, maybe People's Party, or Renovation Party. The name is not important. The important thing is the commitment not to receive donations from corporations, only from individuals.
Check out the Justice Party, let me know what ya think...
A third party has no chance without proportional representation. Only proportional representation and referendums will alter the political landscape.
For this you need a revolution or an outsider like Ron Paul to become president. A willing president needs to declare an emergency to bypass Congres and the Senate to implement such a plan.
In a democracy the people should be in control of the government. It is better to have the option to organise a referendum on every possible item. In this way the people can introduce legislation or reject legislation, appoint judges and remove judges from their position. A referendum can solve issues far more efficiently than the political debate does. For example, the health care debate in the United States became heated, while opponents of the reform claimed to have a majority. A referendum may take the issue of the table so the country can move on.
A two party system has its disadvantages. It may be better to have proportional representation where the number of seats a party fetches reflects the number of votes the party did get. In this way it will be more easy to start a new political party. Furthermore in the United States political parties often try to obstruct the political agenda of the other party. A US President that faces a majority of the opposing party, is considered to be a lame duck. It may be better to compromise, or to take the best of both approaches. This is only going to happen in a coalition government. Coalition governments also have disadvantages, most notably they are less stable.
Proportional representation may also increase voter turnout as people feel better represented in parliament. Currently the United States has one of the lowest turnout rates in the Western world, which is less than 50%. In Western Europe voter turnout rates are often in the 70-90% range. This indicates that people in the United States feel less represented by politicians than people in Europe. Remarkably Swiss voter turnout rates are slightly below 70%, but this may be caused by the fact that Switzerland has binding referendums, so voters can always assert their power, regardless of who is in office.
Another reason for the low voter turnout in the United States is that politicians are bought by special interest groups and corporations. Once the politicians are in office, they start to represent the special interest groups and corporations that funded their campaings. In Western Europe the practise of buying politians is less prevalent because in Western Europe candidates spend less on political campaigns. It is better that money does not play an important role in political campaigns. Political parties can better be funded by fixed membership contributions as the only source of income.
Elections can only be democratic when the voting process is verifiable. Voting machines can be fraudulently manipulated. Therefore elections should be done without the use of voting machines or using machines that are verifiable by leaving a paper trail. Every case of elections fraud should be investigated. In many countries there is a population register that is used to send eligible voters a card in the mail. This method is far less prone to fraud than registering voters before every election.
Often a small group of politically active people and lobyists have a large influence on political decisions. A referendum can also be helpful to reduce the influence of activists and lobyists. Lobbying itself may be needed because politicians do not have inside knowledge of an industry and may otherwise impose regulation that is not practical. Lobbying should therefore be done openly and meetings of politicians and lobbyists should be open to the public and they should be recorded on tapes available to the public.
http://www.naturalmoney.org/buildfuture.html#popa
That was one of the most reasoned posts about politics that I have read on this site! Much better than the drivel that passes for talk on some threads.
here is an idea for a third party: http://thenewthirdparty.blogspot.com
Sophocracy might be the 3rd party many are talking about now.
OWS needs to more emphatically propound the rational, non-sophomoric and respectable ideas around which the majority of Americans can coalesce and support and which are detailed on http://www.sophocracy.com.
Obama collected $70 million in campaign donations in the third quarter of2011, almost entirely from the wealthy and large corporations; that's $70 million more in corruption and bribery to act against the interests of the 99%. Of course your idea is fantastic and should be one of the basic concrete ideas of a revolt that's serious about being successful.
Obama collected $70 million in campaign donations in the third quarter of2011, almost entirely from the wealthy and large corporations; that's $70 million more in corruption and bribery to act against the interests of the 99%. Of course your idea is fantastic and should be one of the basic concrete ideas of a revolt that's serious about being successful.
Obama collected $70 million in campaign donations in the third quarter of2011, almost entirely from the wealthy and large corporations; that's $70 million more in corruption and bribery to act against the interests of the 99%. Of course your idea is fantastic and should be one of the basic concrete ideas of a revolt that's serious about being successful.
I can't believe how much money candidates receive in donations...even those who trail so far behind the rest. For example, doesn't Perry have something like 16 million? Seriously, he could drop out of the race and live off of that personally forever! Do they have to return that money once they drop out?
I should think that the important thing is getting elected to Congress so that they can pass laws that take the money out of politics.
But then you're talking about getting a majority in the House and a super-majority in the Senate. That means you need to draw on Democratic and/or Republican support, since it would be impossible to build a nation-wide party of such power in just a few years.
But if you're drawing on Democratic and/or Republican support even after starting this third party, why not start drawing on it now?
The whole third party idea is just a distraction from the real work of getting strong regulation of lobbying and campaign finance passed right now with the politicians we've already got.
Please study carefully where President Obamas funding comes from. He is funded by us, by individuals.
I think you mean "he is funded by billionaire individuals, like Warren Buffet".
We need a party that refuses money from corporations, and refuses donations of more than 10 thousand dollars from the same individual.
Check out www.fairvote.org
You'll see viable 3rd parties if the US changes how it elects representatives.
This is the solution.
Of course Republicons would like nothing better than for masses of voters to flush their votes down the toilet voting for a Third Party candidate.
They would even pay good money to help a Third Party along.
Cons will do anything to sabotage democracy.
They'd even post a post like this.
Why the mysterious time gap on this post?