Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Rep. Deutch Introduces OCCUPIED Constitutional Amendment To Ban Corporate Money In Politics

page: 2
129
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Corporations, unions, PAC's, special interest groups, lobbyists.
They all need to be specifically spelled out.
If not? Then it'd be just a partisan move and illustrate how partisan OWS is.

Be specific, and I may even support a move like this.

But as it stands now, it is too weak, too lame, too toothless to make a real impact.


I totally agree! I do not trust anyone, let alone a politician, who calls the USA a democracy. WE ARE A REPUBLIC--at least we're supposed to be one! A democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for supper...a Republic is one well-armed lamb...




posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   
if anyone ever tryes to say ows has achived nothing,
there is now a bill,
it has not passed yet but with the support of the 99%

the people can make this AN ELECTION ISSIUE

power to the people

xploder
edit on 20-11-2011 by XPLodER because: spelling



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 02:00 AM
link   
I hate to be negative, but if any of you think we can turn this around from the voting box...I beg you to turn off your televisions and visit your local libraries and read books for a few years. Some of you may not know history, but I promise you...those who control the Actors who play the role of "world leaders" not only know history but write it.



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by FrenchOsage
 


this is not controlable,
a mind once freeded is imposable to imprison in lies.

voting is not the answer for the awakened,
but it resonates with the wider audience who are not aware.

we must try every avenue to succeed

edit to add,
the power of the people will write history from here forward

xploder
edit on 20-11-2011 by XPLodER because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by ladykenzie
 


Well put and I agree completely. It needs to state NO money from corporations or business of any kind. This guy is trying to fly this one by us. It's a ply folks. Give us a little of what we want but they'll keep shoving it up our tail pipe with wording.

No offense here but we all pretty much agree the way our Constitution is being treated by our government today makes it about as useful as a piece of toilet paper anyway. Who cares about an amendment? Not the government.....



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


We were just talking about this. Gotta give credit where it's due though. It's a step in the right direction.
Also Beez, please tell me this helps clear some of the B.S. away. The media has a lot of conservatives saying Occupy is not focused on government, yet here we have a member of government introducing a amendment that recognized the true desire of the group.

I've been telling all the detractors, this isn't a movement against big business but a movement against the conflict of interest between them and the government. Now here is some real source, non media biased, evidence.



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Habit4ming
 


We are not a republic! We are just supposed to be.

We appear to be a democracy for the privileged. Maybe if he can tack some balls on this bill it could help level the playing field.



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Oh, but I am behind you 100 percent. If they added those things and contributions came just from the people, I'd be sold. Someone should alter it to include those things then we will all cosign it, start a petition, and once we have so many signatures we email to Deutch in mass.



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 03:38 AM
link   
You better add the environmentalist and churches to or the corporations and the rich will just funnel money through them, take the hinze's charitable trust that supported Kerry through his wife.

Or the religious right churches that funnels money to the Tea Party Candidates

The democrats in Calif have tried to pass this type anti big money laws but they always tried to stop corperation from giving money to the republicans while exempting unions and environmentalist that support the democrats.



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


Yep. We gotta get them all. Like I said, we should draft up a fresh version using Deutch's as a template and then pass it around with petition and then everyone email it to him and have it reintroduced. It would be amazing if an amendment partially by the people was passed.



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by LazyGuy
 


Well halleluiah. It's long overdue. Now let's take away the Corporate Individual status and the ability to patent forms of life and we can turn our attention to Fractional and No reserve banking next. Who knows maybe we can enforce the anti-trust legislation already on the books.

But before we get too excited, let's remember this is election time and the Democrats need a little help. When this is passed and signed into law, then I will buy the drinks. Until then, at least it sounds hopeful.



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by ANNED
 


Yep. We gotta get them all. Like I said, we should draft up a fresh version using Deutch's as a template and then pass it around with petition and then everyone email it to him and have it reintroduced. It would be amazing if an amendment partially by the people was passed.


What a novel idea. A document passed into law that was, at least in part, written by THE PEOPLE.

Fortunately, there is a precedent for doing exactly that.
edit on 20-11-2011 by LazyGuy because: Edit for pic. First time I've used the new ATS uploader



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 05:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Q:1984A:1776
 




Corporations are not people, therefore their money cannot be considered "free speech" dammit! I can't believe this wasn't originally in our constitution. Perhaps our founding fathers simply thought that the people couldn't possibly be stupid enough to allow government to twist the constitution the way they did by allowing corporations to lobby the congress under the protection of the 1st amendment.


Actually... Corporations were in fact recently granted the status of "persons" in every legal sense of the word. (Then what are birth certificates for.)

Also for the first hundred years or so of our country's history corporations were only granted charters if they could prove that they were working in the public interest, and then only for the term of the project or ten years. (I wonder why they never mentioned that in history class in school. Oh, that's right, the history books were commissioned and printed by corporate publishing houses.)

Eventually Rockefeller approached one of the New England States - doing this from memory and it is late here - and offered to deliver truckloads of money if he could get around those public good and time constraint inconveniences and just operate for profit. The State in question said yes, and then another, and another and finally all the States wanted truckloads of money delivered.

Now you know.
edit on 20-11-2011 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
all i can say is its about time! i really hope this passes.



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
elected officials should also have hours they are considered on the job for the entire duration of the time they spend as a public servant (on the job) the will be recorded on video and audio
their phones and computers should be tapped not to provide detailed information but simply to record who the official is contacting and when
at no time prior to office,in office, or after having run in office will any elected official take position with a salary of greater than $150,000 a year and benifits totaling greater than $200,000

i think these are just common sense
the public should be privy to any and all actions an elected official makes while weilding authority granted to them by the public
and i think most people dont understand the real issue its not about money being given .....thats small potatoes the real big attraction for the politicians is the extremely well paying and powerful jobs they are offered for when they get out of office (and sometimes while still in office)



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ladykenzie
I can almost support this bill, except for one major inherent problem- the "for-profit corporations" thing. For one thing, super PACs are non-profit. Any corporate entity can funnel their funds via the guise of "non-profit."

Union money out as well.

Only natural persons.


Couldn't have said it better. Personally, I believe for-profit corporate influence is the most poisonous, followed by super PACs, followed by unions, but they're all bad influences to have in our government. More importantly, however, the bill would have a much better chance deflecting argument if it included all those things. This is the equivalent of a Republican putting up a bill to ban union influence, while continuing to allow the influence of corporations which may be largely foreign-owned (through shareholders) -- it seems shockingly wrong. Let's get ALL of it out, and allow natural-persons contributions only.

Realistically, if such a bill were passed and actually enforced, it would be the one bill which could heal this nation completely (over time.)



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Ittabena
 


Wow Ittabena - I had no idea about this. Marked down to read up and educate friends and neighbors over beers.
Thanks for the tidbit!



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Yay! A step in the right direction. I love that the amendment is called OCCUPIED lol. Of course I can see that it is not perfect but it does appeal Citizens United which is a critical step. Representative Deutch's constituents need to contact him and get him to add in Unions and superPAC's or even just limit them all in how much 1 entity or body can contribute or make it public funded only. The rest of us need to our part in letting our Reps. know that we want this passed. He may be right in his thinking though because maybe too drastic of a change will have zero chance of passing.

Thanks for sharing OP.
S+F
edit on 20-11-2011 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by capninsano240
elected officials should also have hours they are considered on the job for the entire duration of the time they spend as a public servant (on the job) the will be recorded on video and audio
their phones and computers should be tapped not to provide detailed information but simply to record who the official is contacting and when
at no time prior to office,in office, or after having run in office will any elected official take position with a salary of greater than $150,000 a year and benifits totaling greater than $200,000


Well, that would take almost all of the FUN out of it.
I wonder how many "politicians" there would be if the goal was truly a public service job.

Although I have voted in various elections, I've always said that anyone who wants the job probably shouldn't get it.
They ALWAYS have ulterior motives.

Maybe the whole election process should be changed.
Maybe WE could nominate someone instead of being PRESENTED with two candidates.

I nominate Skeptic Overlord for President.
Can I get a Second?



posted on Nov, 20 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Your going to ask Congressmen and Senators to pass a bill that would DEPRIVE THEM OF MONEY,
what PLANET are you from??? Do you think that people that vote THEMSELVES a pay raise at 11:00PM, on a Saturday, would want a bill like this to pass??? I think that that's the right way to go, take out the money from politics and you would have REAL people representing us in Washington...wouldn't that be something??? The thing is, it's like Term Limits, the people who it will effect are the people who have to vote on it. Why can't "We the People" vote on things like this??? We must get control of our goverment, it has gotten so big and unruly it is turning on us.





new topics

top topics



 
129
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join