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.
Do you think a system of public funds available for candidates would allow for more politicians to work in their constituents public interest more so than they do now?
Could the gridlock in Washington be not over just who has solutions to the nation's problem but who will have the greater access to various, moneyed special interests?
The SCOTUS ruling (http://archive.wbai.org/files/mp3/100128_090001freeforum.MP3 - broken link) could be a blessing in disguise if the movement for public campaign finance gains a much needed boost.
"Wall Street firms and their executives have been uniquely generous to both political parties, emerging recently as one of the largest benefactors of the Democratic Party. Between November 2008 and November 2009, Wall Street firms and executives handed out $42 million to lawmakers, mostly to members of the House and Senate banking committees and House and Senate leaders. During the 2008 elections, Wall Street showered Democratic candidates with well over $88 million and Republicans with over $67 million, putting the Street right up there with the insurance industry as among the nation's largest equal-opportunity donors."
"Now many of us -- and I'm the first on this list -- believe we can begin this process with an obvious first step first: with Congress enacting the Fair Elections Now Act, now. That statute would fundamentally change the economy of influence in Washington. By giving members an option to rely upon small dollar contributions alone (maxed at $100 a citizen), we could at least create the possibility that Congress would be filled with Members whose integrity no one could doubt. That's not a promise that Congress would get everything right. But it is the assurance that when they get things wrong, Americans won't have to believe they betrayed principle or the public will because of money."
Whne you take away free speech you are hurting the country
Now this is what's really hurting the country. Public officials not serving the public interest and being selfish to boot.
"For Shelby, moreover, there are other compelling interests at play. A major tanker plant in the heart of Alabama could result in hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs for his state. And well before he decided to hold up 70 presidential nominees, he proved he was willing to go to great parliamentary lengths to secure goodies for his state. in 2009, Taxpayers for Common Sense ranked him the second most proficient securer of earmarks, having brought home $114,484,250 worth of pet projects. In addition to the EADS contract, Shelby also is currently attempting to secure a $45 million improvised explosive device testing lab for the FBI, according to CongressDaily.
"I guess if you needed one example of what's wrong with this town, it might be that one senator can hold up 70 qualified individuals to make government work better because he didn't get his earmarks," Gibbs said. "If that's not the poster child for how this town needs to change the way it works, I fear there won't be a greater example of silliness throughout the entire year of 2010."
We've been doing that for presidential elections since the 1970s, a legacy of Watergate. You check a box on your 1040 and $3 of your income tax goes to the fund. I seem to remember a story in the paper (a real newspaper, the Washington Post, not the crap most of you guys read like Huffington, KOS or Politico) that reported that fewer and fewer people were doing the check-off.
Now this is what's really hurting the country. Public officials not serving the public interest and being selfish to boot.
"For Shelby, moreover, there are other compelling interests at play. A major tanker plant in the heart of Alabama could result in hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs for his state. And well before he decided to hold up 70 presidential nominees, he proved he was willing to go to great parliamentary lengths to secure goodies for his state. in 2009, Taxpayers for Common Sense ranked him the second most proficient securer of earmarks, having brought home $114,484,250 worth of pet projects. In addition to the EADS contract, Shelby also is currently attempting to secure a $45 million improvised explosive device testing lab for the FBI, according to CongressDaily.
"I guess if you needed one example of what's wrong with this town, it might be that one senator can hold up 70 qualified individuals to make government work better because he didn't get his earmarks," Gibbs said. "If that's not the poster child for how this town needs to change the way it works, I fear there won't be a greater example of silliness throughout the entire year of 2010."
If his voters do not like it they will vote him out.
If he has done anything illegal they will get him.
the left so loves free speech when it comes to urinating on the flag.
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.
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.
