Senate Democrats Introduce We The People Act Seeking to Reverse Citizens United

Here's a rich story about some U.S. Senators that all-of-a-sudden want to pass a bill that cuts Citizens United !!!

Can you imagine what Hillary is thinking?

My God, she is using it to her advantage and so are other Democrats.

Amazing how these goats think people won't see through this obvious campaign trick.

Now these Democrats will expect people to vote for Hillary !!!

Where were these bills 2 years ago?



Senate Democrats Introduce We The People Act Seeking to Reverse Citizens United

Fighting to reverse the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, curtail dark money, and close the revolving door between Wall Street and the government, several Senate Democrats joined together on Thursday to announce the 2016 We The People Act. Besides disclosing the names of donors who contribute more than $10,000 during an election cycle, the legislation also seeks to permanently ban former members of Congress from lobbying.

“Six years ago, the Supreme Court put a ‘For Sale’ sign on our elections with the Citizens United ruling,” Sen. Tom Udall stated during a press conference on Thursday. “The McCutcheon opinion followed. Now, one person can give $3.6 million directly to campaigns and to parties. A full-time minimum wage worker would have to work 239 years to make that kind of money.”

Led by Sens. Chuck Schumer, Sheldon Whitehouse, Tom Udall, and Jeff Merkley, the We The People Act seeks to chip away at the concept of dark money by revealing the names of Super PAC donors who contribute more than $10,000 during an election cycle while requiring all candidates for federal office to report any donations over $1,000 to the FEC within 48 hours. Although senators currently have a two-year ban on lobbying after leaving office, and House members have a one-year ban, the bill would also seek a permanent ban on lobbying by former members of Congress.

We The People Act

Yup, it's an "Act" alright !!!

a reply to: xuenchen

Well, we'll see how much traction this gets but at least it's something so I'll take it!

Only you could make something good into a bad thing xue, all because it's Democrats that presented the bill and not Republicans.

I would bet money if the shoe was on the other (Republican) foot you'd be praising the move as a great one.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

You realize this "Act" is a campaign trick right?

Democrats use the 1st Amendment to their advantage just as much as Republicans.

The best thing for Obama in 2012 was Citizens United.

a reply to: xuenchen

What isn't a campaign trick during election season? If we go by your standards then we shouldn't believe anything either side presents. Would I be correct in assuming you won't believe anything the Republicans present until the election is over?

a reply to: xuenchen

Wasn't it a conservative group called Citizens United and conservative picked Supreme Court judges who created this mess under the guise of free speech?

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: xuenchen

Wasn't it a conservative group called Citizens United and conservative picked Supreme Court judges who created this mess under the guise of free speech?

And the irony was some big money was lost on Romney in 2012.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I take anything said by anybody with a grain of salt.

a reply to: xuenchen

See the problem is, you only see Red v Blue and fail to acknowledge both groups are bought and paid for by the wealthy elite. So there is no irony because whether it's a D or a R they Win.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Only you could make something good into a bad thing xue, all because it's Democrats that presented the bill and not Republicans.

I would bet money if the shoe was on the other (Republican) foot you'd be praising the move as a great one.

It would be great if it had a chance to pass and wasn't a political tactic. I am surprised an '3NL1GHT3N3D1' can't see through this liberal BS.

I would have to agree that it's some kind of trick. Considering that the SCOTUS has already ruled on this, wouldn't such an act immediately be challenged and stricken down as soon as it becomes law?

a reply to: Swills

You actually think I vote for National Republicans ?

a reply to: xuenchen

99% of your threads are attempts to bash one side of the political spectrum. It seems to me you only take one sides words with a grain of salt while letting the other side slide.

originally posted by: Arizonaguy
I would have to agree that it's some kind of trick. Considering that the SCOTUS has already ruled on this, wouldn't such an act immediately be challenged and stricken down as soon as it becomes law?

I think Congress can pass a law restricting it.

If the President signs it, the Court ruling is null.

But we still have the 1st Amendment to consider.

Any law like this will get challenged again.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Yes Watson.

The Left side is the worst end.

a reply to: xuenchen

If that's what it takes to get Citizens United repealed than so be it. Both the Democrats and the Republicans should have repealed that piece of crap legislation a long time ago! They're both guilty for ignoring it. That ruling only showed how much corporations have control over our judges and our government officials!

If we keep voting for these same representatives who don't give a damn about the voice of the people, it's our own fault. We still have voters electing the same 25-30 year incumbents into office that our well into their early and late 70's! Enough already, kick the b@stards out!

The only reason they're still walking the halls of congress and the senate at such an old age is because they're self-serving themselves on the backs of taxpayer's money! Who else would retire if they're getting paid a huge salary, receiving great healthcare and job benefits? They do absolutely nothing! They don't even take the time to read an entire bill, and than can't even show up to vote! Pushing a frick'en electronic voting switch is too much!

We don't hold these @ssholes accountable if we allow them to make a career out of a temporary public office!

Cool.

Bring CU down!

Money is not free speech.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Arizonaguy
I would have to agree that it's some kind of trick. Considering that the SCOTUS has already ruled on this, wouldn't such an act immediately be challenged and stricken down as soon as it becomes law?

I think Congress can pass a law restricting it.

If the President signs it, the Court ruling is null.

But we still have the 1st Amendment to consider.

Any law like this will get challenged again.

No, that's not the way it works. The Supreme Court is the final authority on what is Constitutional and what is not. Neither the President nor Congress has the authority to nullify a Supreme Court ruling, except by Constitutional amendment.

a reply to: Metallicus

I have no doubt in my mind it is a political move and will go nowhere in the end, but the same exact thing could be said with what Republicans present this election cycle as well. Trump or Hillary, it doesn't matter, both are politicians and both are lying through their teeth to get elected.

Is the idea good? Absolutely, CU needs to be repealed immediately because it is the single biggest issue with our country by a long shot in my opinion.

If anything maybe this will get the cogs moving, at least that's what I hope will happen. Probably wishful thinking on my part but I like the bill regardless of whether it's a genuine attempt or not.

Didn't Bernie Sanders want to get CU off the table?

No wonder he's out on Left Field, standing there chewing gum and slapping his ball glove like something MIGHT happen.

US Politicians of all stripes love the money they get from the Soros/Koch types. It's PARTY TIME every two years.