Romney wants to control who can politically contribute. (Obama, lobbyist, how much)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Romney: Teacher contributions to politicians should be limited
(CBS News) Republican nominee Mitt Romney said Tuesday that Democratic politicians have a conflict of interest in dealing with teacher unions because the unions contribute so heavily to their campaigns. He suggested that money should somehow be diverted or cut off, although he did not offer details.
Are we to think that no politician has been influenced by BIG OIL?
Wow, how can he say that when so many lobbyist groups have the ear of politicians and give big money to them? What kind of an America would we have if corporations can donate to candidates but teachers and the little guy can't?
Wow. Just wow. Had lunch today with my sister who taught for 40 years in Wisconsin working with special ed students. She asked me if Romney had said anything stupid today and I said I didn't think so. Now I have to call her. Guess next time she's in town we'll have to do a late supper.
Romney is 100% correct. It is indeed a massive conflict of interest and it should be stopped.
The bigger problem, Romney said, is that "the person sitting across the table from them should not have received the largest campaign contribution from the teachers union themselves ... [It's] an extraordinary conflict of interest and something that should be addressed."
He later added that "we simply can't have" elected officials who have received large contributions from teachers sitting across from them at the bargaining table "supposedly" to represent the interests of children. "I think it's a mistake," Romney said. "I think we have to get the money out of the teachers unions going into campaigns. It's the wrong way for us to go. We've got to separate that."
The best way to terminate this deliberate fraud is to eliminate collective barginning. Unions can still contribute to whomever they please, and the union membership can contribute to whomever they please, the public unions simply cannot represent their membership when it comes time to negotiate their contract.
Yes, only those who he thinks will support him for whatever job he's applying ... should be permitted to contribute. Every day and every time he opens his big mouth and sticks both feet inside ... is a good day for the Obama re-election campaign. What an idiot!
Romney is 100% correct. It is indeed a massive conflict of interest and it should be stopped.
The bigger problem, Romney said, is that "the person sitting across the table from them should not have received the largest campaign contribution from the teachers union themselves ... [It's] an extraordinary conflict of interest and something that should be addressed."
He later added that "we simply can't have" elected officials who have received large contributions from teachers sitting across from them at the bargaining table "supposedly" to represent the interests of children. "I think it's a mistake," Romney said. "I think we have to get the money out of the teachers unions going into campaigns. It's the wrong way for us to go. We've got to separate that."
The best way to terminate this deliberate fraud is to eliminate collective barginning. Unions can still contribute to whomever they please, and the union membership can contribute to whomever they please, the public unions simply cannot represent their membership when it comes time to negotiate their contract.
Let me get this straight. It's perfectly okay for Romney to sit across the table from people who pay $50,000 a plate to have dinner with him BUT it's not okay for candidates or elected officials to sit across the table from a teacher who donates $10 to $25 to a campaign. If I live to be 100 I'll never understand neo-con logic!
I don't know, the liberals are mad because he wants money out of politics regarding teachers, but they would be happy if he said he wanted money out of politics regarding big oil
One again, the selective outrage by the left is staggering.....
Let me get this straight. It's perfectly okay for Romney to sit across the table from people who pay $50,000 a plate to have dinner with him BUT it's not okay for candidates or elected officials to sit across the table from a teacher who donates $10 to $25 to a campaign. If I live to be 100 I'll never understand neo-con logic!
Romney apparently sat across the table from a teacher; here's what the teacher had to say after. It's no wonder Romney wants to silence teachers (Yes, it's clearly an Obama campaign blurb, and yes, it is a teacher speaking out):
Let me get this straight. It's perfectly okay for Romney to sit across the table from people who pay $50,000 a plate to have dinner with him BUT it's not okay for candidates or elected officials to sit across the table from a teacher who donates $10 to $25 to a campaign. If I live to be 100 I'll never understand neo-con logic!
That is correct, because he is not negotiating a union contract. Liberal freaks and communists on the other hand have to bribe elected officials and commit election fraud to get their goals accomplished.
The big difference I see is that big oil is private business and teachers Unions are public sector. I do see a conflict of interest. That said I would love to see all big money taken out of campaign finance. I would also like to see a cap on spending, Imagine if they had to explain their position in 100 words or less each comercial. I wonder how much that would cut down on the lies and the slander?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.