Congress Attempts to Kill Third-Party "Threat"

What scares the DemocRATS and RepubliCONS more than anything? A viable third party threat. A great example of that is Jesse Ventura in Minnesota. He proves that a third party candidate can be elected and can be a successful representative of the people.

The Republicrat establishment cannot handle this.

So now there is legislation in the works to stymie third-party efforts. Read this. And call and write your representatives to tell them what you think of this effort to thwart democracy.

Congress Attempts to Kill the "Third-Party Threat"

Proposed Legislation Creates Treasury-Funded Campaigns for the Two Major Parties, Leaving Third Parties with No Means to Run


(Washington, D.C.) On February 1, congressional Democrats, led by Rep. Obey of Wisconsin, introduced a bill, H.R. 4694, that would end viable, third-party competition in races for the U.S. House of Representatives.www.lp.org...

At this late stage of the game, third party candidates are our only hope to break the power lock in Washingon and to give power back to the people.

Speaking of Jesse Ventura... I wish he'd run for president as an independent. That would rock. I admire the h e double l outta him.

Here's the link (again) to that article..
www.lp.org...

So far there's been no response to this thread.

And folks wonder why there's a Republicrat lock on our government?

I hope folks do look into this and make some noise!

Nobody is going to make a stink about it becuase for the most part people dont care, they just accept the us and them setup and dont want to consider anything outside that, because we have been a two party country for so long that to change now would be asking too much of most people.

Personally I think this is a major outrage, and nothing more than a power grab by both parties disquised as election campaign finance reform. The problem is that both parties are indoubtedly going to support this bill so there wont be a ready-made party line resistance to work off of.

Believe it or not, the Republicrat party, aided and abetted by the mainstream media, is what killed the possible presidential candidacy of Howard Dean.

He scared the establishment with his popularity and independence.

thomas.loc.gov...:H.R.4696

Here's the govmt's official site regarding this repulsive power play.

There are many people who have rocked the boat in the past and will continue to do so. There's a reason the Greens and the Libertarians, while differing widely on issues, have common cause. And treat each other with (gasp!) respect.

There is also a reason why many voted for Ross Perot, despite his limitations, and for Independent Gov. Ventura who was reasonably successful and among the most honorable men around for quite some time.

(It should be noted we should not write screaming letters to our congress to abort HR 4696. It contains some excellent anti-lobbying proposals such as taking away floor "privileges" from former House members who are now registered lobbyists.)

[edit on 2/13/2006 by Noumenon]

mod edit, removed : after link


[edit on 13-2-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Believe it or not, the Republicrat party, aided and abetted by the mainstream media, is what killed the possible presidential candidacy of Howard Dean.

He scared the establishment with his popularity and independence.

Gee, Eck, I thought you were a Republican. At least you were last week.

Seriously, I heard that Gephardt and Kerry worked together to knock Dean out of the race, beginning with the Iowa caucus. Gephardt threw his support behind Kerry, and this was the result:

www.style.org...

Are you sure of that Bill number? Googling H.R. 4694 gives

H.R.4694
Title: To provide for flexibility in making emergency Federal procurements, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Burton, Dan [IN-6] (introduced 5/9/2002) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 5/9/2002 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
thomas.loc.gov...:h.r.04694

Notice that the bill was sponsored by an Independent.

[edit on 14-2-2006 by jsobecky]

How low can you go?

Maybe, just maybe, that would make people on "both" sides of the aisle think, hm, maybe there is NO REAL DIFFERENCE between the two "major" parties!

Republicrat indeed!

I still intend to vote for any Constitution Party candidates!

Oh my god. This is horrifying. However, this could be seen coming, Republicans and Democrats only care about having power, they don't care about the founding principles of our nation, they don't care about the citizen.

As somebody who voted Libertarian last election this news has me wanting to bash my head through my monitor.

- Attero

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Attero Auctorita]

Originally posted by jsobecky
Are you sure of that Bill number? Googling H.R. 4694 gives

H.R.4694
Title: To provide for flexibility in making emergency Federal procurements, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Burton, Dan [IN-6] (introduced 5/9/2002) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 5/9/2002 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
thomas.loc.gov...:h.r.04694

Notice that the bill was sponsored by an Independent.

[edit on 14-2-2006 by jsobecky]

It is the correct bill number.

H.R.4694
Let the People Decide Clean Campaign Act (Introduced in House)

TITLE III--INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES

SEC. 301. BAN ON INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES IN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTIONS.

Section 315 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection;

`(k) No person may make any independent expenditure with respect to an election for the office of Representative in, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress.'.

SEC. 302. BAN USE OF NONFEDERAL FUNDS FOR CERTAIN DISBURSEMENTS.

Title III of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

`BAN ON USE OF NONFEDERAL FUNDS FOR CERTAIN DISBURSEMENTS

`SEC. 325.

`No person may make any disbursement in connection with a campaign for an election for the office of Representative in, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress, or any disbursement in connection with any public communication made for purposes of supporting, opposing, attacking, promoting, or mentioning a candidate in such an election, unless the funds used for the disbursement are subject to the limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements of this Act.'.

Link

Originally posted by jsobecky
Notice that the bill was sponsored by an Independent.
[edit on 14-2-2006 by jsobecky]

Nice try.

David Ross Obey (pronounced Obie) (born October 3, 1938) is an American politician. He has been a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives since 1969, representing the Seventh Congressional District of Wisconsin (map).

Link

Cosponsors Link :
Rosa DeLauro = Democrat
Bob Filner = Democrat
Barney Frank = Democrat
Steve Israel = Democrat
James P McGovern = Democrat
Tim Ryan = Democrat
Henry A. Waxman = Democrat

Looks like they're tired of losing votes to the 3rd party candidates eh?

- Attero

Wait a minute... Wasn't it always the Democrats that were complaining about losing elections because of lost votes to 3rd party candidates?

I still find this hard to believe... Where is the public outcry? Why haven't I seen anything about this anywhere but here? you would think something this big would get some publicity.

Originally posted by LostSailor
you would think something this big would get some publicity.

You would? Corporations own the Republicrat party, as well as the media.

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Attero Auctorita]

The power elite is afraid that a Third Party hero will rise and take away the control that they have been able to gain through briberies, dirty tricks and extortion to control the country with poppet Presidents.

The days of shooting the opposition are gone so now if you are not rich and don't belong to the Right circles or sell your soul to corporate favoritism you will never be able to be the President of the United states.

So now when a teacher tell a second grader that he or she can become the president of the US, unless you are from the wealthy and rich that teacher is lying.

[edit on 16-2-2006 by marg6043]

Originally posted by Attero Auctorita

You would? Corporations own the Republicrat party, as well as the media.

I'm sorry, is the Republicrat party a 3rd party or something? Because I've never heard of it. All I said was "it looks like the Democratic party is the one pushing this Bill." And... I'm pretty sure we call the media the "liberal media" for a reason in this country.

Originally posted by LostSailor

Originally posted by Attero Auctorita

You would? Corporations own the Republicrat party, as well as the media.

I'm sorry, is the Republicrat party a 3rd party or something? Because I've never heard of it. All I said was "it looks like the Democratic party is the one pushing this Bill." And... I'm pretty sure we call the media the "liberal media" for a reason in this country.

Here let me define Republicrat for you, first off it is a combination of two words: Republican and Democrat. This combination is intended to depict that they are two sides of the same coin. What better way is there to control the policy of a government than for rich (corporations) to "purchase" both of the major parties. That would kind of up their chances of controlling a countries politics wouldnt it?

We all know it takes gobs of money to become president, where do gobs of money come from? Corporations have big gobs of money, which they will give to those groups who further their agenda, along with this money they control the media, they can say boost the ratings of a president by giving them favorable coverage, and damage a contender by giving them disfavorable coverage (say Dean for instance). Or they can give them very little coverage at all (for instance, like they did with all 3rd party candidates). I'm sure you notice how come election time we only really hear about Republicans and Democrats and all 3rd party candidates are cast off as radical etc. Connect the dots.

If there was a liberal media, you would think they would promote the Democratic party, and instead of having a two term Republican president, we would always have a Democratic one.

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Attero Auctorita]

Originally posted by Attero Auctorita
Here let me define Republicrat for you, first off it is a combination of two words: Republican and Democrat. This combination is intended to depict that they are two sides of the same coin.

Ok... I gotcha now... you are just another one of them. My bad.

Who am I? A linguist? A radical? A progandandist? A stereotyper? A partisan?

I know who you are as well, you're one of "them."

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Attero Auctorita]