Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-20-2011, 05:53 PM
 
9,848 posts, read 8,299,496 times
Reputation: 3296

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtimer2 View Post
I believe that we need a constitutional amendment limiting the size of campaign contributions from any and all sources.

I also believe that all contributions should have to be reported and open for public review, at least those contributions made above $500.00 or so per person or group.

I think that this could go a long ways toward eliminating the corrupting influences of our political institutions and laws by special interest groups.

What say you?

1) Yep

2) Nope

3) No change

4) I got a better idea
NO, we in fact need a Balanced Budget Amendment. We have a spending problem with politicians.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2011, 07:33 PM
 
1,233 posts, read 1,220,471 times
Reputation: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCCCB View Post
NO, we in fact need a Balanced Budget Amendment. We have a spending problem with politicians.
No doubt we have a spending problem with politicians, they cost too much to buy these days.

Before the Citizens United case, them pesky politicians just could not get their greedy paws on enough slush money to properly buy the offices they were running for.

Now that there is free reign to promote (Purchase) your favorite candidate, you just gotta find some way to get your money back.

That is where them very useful no bid government contracts can come in real handy.

This does run up the cost of government, but at least we can all sleep well at night knowing that the money was not spent on them useless social programs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 08:11 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,293 posts, read 20,794,909 times
Reputation: 9330
Nope.

We should remove all restrictions.

Like other useless government wars and efforts, "campaign finance reform" is a useless effort.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 08:14 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
4,897 posts, read 8,332,996 times
Reputation: 1911
Yes, absolutely. As long as special interests are allowed to give unlimited amounts of money to politicians than our government will continue to be for sale to the highest bidder. Instead of making policies which are good for the majority of Americans or for the country in general we will continue to get policies which benefit just the wealthy few who give the most money via their lobbyists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2011, 08:16 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
4,897 posts, read 8,332,996 times
Reputation: 1911
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
That video is bs because it claims we have campaign finance reform. First of all we have NEVER had meaningful campaign finance reform and second of all the right wing majority on the Supreme Court tossed out 120 years worth of campaign finance laws when they issued the Citizens United verdict which removed all campaign finance laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2011, 10:58 AM
 
1,233 posts, read 1,220,471 times
Reputation: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Nope.

We should remove all restrictions.

Like other useless government wars and efforts, "campaign finance reform" is a useless effort.
Remove all restrictions....

Brilliant idea that one.

I am sure that China would be more than happy to help you out with that one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2011, 11:00 AM
 
334 posts, read 188,939 times
Reputation: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtimer2 View Post
I believe that we need a constitutional amendment limiting the size of campaign contributions from any and all sources.

I also believe that all contributions should have to be reported and open for public review, at least those contributions made above $500.00 or so per person or group.

I think that this could go a long ways toward eliminating the corrupting influences of our political institutions and laws by special interest groups.

What say you?

1) Yep

2) Nope

3) No change

4) I got a better idea
Yes, we do. Contributions should be capped at $5000 per year, and limited only to individuals. No corporations.

After all, I'm only allowed to contribute $5k of my OWN MONEY toward my OWN RETIREMENT. Why should these douchebags get more money just to get a job?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2011, 12:09 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,293 posts, read 20,794,909 times
Reputation: 9330
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtimer2 View Post
Remove all restrictions....

Brilliant idea that one.

I am sure that China would be more than happy to help you out with that one.

Actually you have it backwards. China does not have free elections or freedom of speech.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2011, 12:21 PM
 
1,233 posts, read 1,220,471 times
Reputation: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Actually you have it backwards. China does not have free elections or freedom of speech.
No, the multinational corporations could just funnel money into our elections to purchase their objectives, Right...no restrictions at all remember?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2011, 12:32 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,482,194 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtimer2 View Post
I believe that we need a constitutional amendment limiting the size of campaign contributions from any and all sources.

I also believe that all contributions should have to be reported and open for public review, at least those contributions made above $500.00 or so per person or group.

I think that this could go a long ways toward eliminating the corrupting influences of our political institutions and laws by special interest groups.

What say you?

1) Yep

2) Nope

3) No change

4) I got a better idea
I agree
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:42 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top