Until we take the money out of politics, the corporations and the wealthy own our government. All viable candidates should receive a set amount of money for their campaigns. The amount received should be based on the power of the positions being sought. The money would come from tax payers. If more is spent than is provided, the candidate should be dropped from the ticket or, if already elected, removed from office. I don’t know how the viability of the candidates would be determined, but any logical process would be better than allowing corporations and the wealthy to buy our government at every level and thus dictate our laws, programs, and policies.
What strikes me as particularly amusing is the fact that neither the commenters here nor Barack Obama understand the Citizens United case.
Nothing in it permits so much as a single dollar of corporate cash to be donated to a candidate.
What it allows is independent expenditures by entities other than a candidate's campaign.
Even under Anon @ 1:38's proposal, private individuals and corporations would STILL be permitted to expend money to spread their own message regarding a candidate, provided they did not coordinate with that candidate's campaign.
8 comments:
Could you explain why you believe "Congress shall make no law" means "Congress can make any damn law it pleases"?
Totally outdone yourself on this one!
A Masterpiece.
Anonymous at 9:12
Can you explain why you are a corporate ass licking dumbass?
p.s. Anonymous at 9:12. Lighten up.
This is awesome!
Sweeeeeeet!!! Looks really nice on them... hope they didn't leave anyone one out!
Until we take the money out of politics, the corporations and the wealthy own our government. All viable candidates should receive a set amount of money for their campaigns. The amount received should be based on the power of the positions being sought. The money would come from tax payers. If more is spent than is provided, the candidate should be dropped from the ticket or, if already elected, removed from office. I don’t know how the viability of the candidates would be determined, but any logical process would be better than allowing corporations and the wealthy to buy our government at every level and thus dictate our laws, programs, and policies.
What strikes me as particularly amusing is the fact that neither the commenters here nor Barack Obama understand the Citizens United case.
Nothing in it permits so much as a single dollar of corporate cash to be donated to a candidate.
What it allows is independent expenditures by entities other than a candidate's campaign.
Even under Anon @ 1:38's proposal, private individuals and corporations would STILL be permitted to expend money to spread their own message regarding a candidate, provided they did not coordinate with that candidate's campaign.
Post a Comment