Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 01/29/2010 6:18:54 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: 3D-JOY; abner; Abundy; AGreatPer; Albion Wilde; AliVeritas; alisasny; ALlRightAllTheTime; ...

PING!


2 posted on 01/29/2010 6:20:53 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (I am Ellie Light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Replace the 17th with an amendment that Senators are elected in unicameral session of the state with a simple majority. Senators are appointed for 6 years and can be recalled by the legislature again in unicameral session, with a 2/3rds majority.


3 posted on 01/29/2010 6:32:45 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
George Will got CFR right a couple of decades ago.

1. No foreign contributions

2. No cash contributions

3. Total disclosure

That's all the CFR we need.

5 posted on 01/29/2010 6:55:52 AM PST by Notary Sojac ("Goldman Sachs" is to "US economy" as "lamprey" is to "lake trout")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Here’s my idea. Each state establishes an Office of Campaign Finance,(OCF). When someone runs for any office, they must register at the OCF and are assigned an account number. All campaign contributions are made to the OCF in the candidates name, and are assigned to the account anonymously. ALL campaign expenditures must come from this account and anyone can contribute as much as they like. If the candidate finds out the source of the contribution, both the candidate and the donor are charged with bribery and the donation is reallocated to the COMPETITORS campaign. This insures that the political parties will police each other. The idea also, is that donations to a campaign will be made based on political philosophy, and not specific promises to a particular contributor. If a contributor secretly admits to a candidate a donation, there is no way to know if it is a lie or not, because contributions are kept secret until after the election.


9 posted on 01/29/2010 8:11:54 AM PST by Boiling point (Beck / Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Some of these ideas have merit, even if only for a good laugh or a wicked grin at the possibilities.

If we are going to solve the problem, I think that we need to start by asking the right question. Yes, there are problems associated with campaign finance, but that’s not where the problem starts.

The problem is that too much power has been usurped by the government and they control too much money and wield too much power. The natural reaction to a body with the power to destroy you or to enhance you is to curry favor.

We need to take back the government and limit their ability to pick winners and losers and to dole out favors and punishment. Take away that power and the need for most of the band aids will disappear.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. (It was profound when I made it up all those years ago and it is profound now. LOL)


10 posted on 01/29/2010 10:28:01 AM PST by Badray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Just keep McCain out of any CFR!

MUST read...http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2440173/posts

[snip] McCain’s Law Preserved Loophole for Tribal Contributions

“Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.), chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee, says the campaign finance reform law he sponsored in 2002 intentionally left open a loophole that allows Indian tribes to make campaign contributions to an unlimited number of candidates for federal office.

Before McCain’s law passed, most Americans were allowed to give an aggregate of only $25,000 to party committees and candidates for federal office in any two-year election cycle. Indian tribes were not subject to that cap. McCain’s law lifted the aggregate-contribution cap to $95,000 for ordinary American contributors, but declined to impose any cap at all on Indian tribes.

When I asked McCain last week why this was the case, he said, “Because tribes are ‘sovereign entities.’ They are treated on a government-to-government relationship, and we’re looking at that whole issue.”

I asked, “But it was an intentional thing?” McCain replied, “Oh yeah. … Because they are ‘sovereign nations’ unquote. We sign treaties with them.”

When I pointed out that the U.S. does not allow contributions from foreign governments, McCain said, “No, we don’t. But they’re American citizens. So, it’s a unique kind of a status.”


11 posted on 01/29/2010 11:03:55 AM PST by AuntB (If Al Qaeda grew drugs & burned our forests instead of armed Mexican Cartels would anyone notice?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson