Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How's this for an idea? Corporations can't spend more on political speech

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Capitalocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 07:34 PM
Original message
How's this for an idea? Corporations can't spend more on political speech
than they pay in taxes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RandomThoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. How about for every dollar a corporation gives.
Edited on Sat Mar-05-11 07:37 PM by RandomThoughts
They get taxed 1 dollar that is split among the opponents.

Why should money from anyone have anything to do with electing anyone?


The problem is the money always creeps in, and free speech is important. So the real correction is to break up the consolidations. It is really simple to understand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. How about
They can donate unlimited amounts to a race and that money is divided amongst all the candidates R + D in that race.

A corp could say they donated it to support candidate x, but half that money also went to candidate z. And then let the people decide.

Actually, as it is now, let those who count the votes decide. Which really is the bigger problem, eh?
What counted your vote?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diane in sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 04:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. They'll just end up owning both sides--like they do now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal Minella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
2. We have a winner. What an absolutely EXCELLENT idea!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. It seems kinda perverse now that you mention it
that they can spend millions and billions of dollars on campaign donations but bitch so loudly about being so overtaxed- all while raking in insane bonuses/profits. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capitalocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Many of them pay nothing or even get free money from the government
while making billions in profits, and yet it's a freedom of speech issue that they can fund and influence our elections. Ridiculous. At least pay taxes if you're going to be writing government policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. I paid far more in income taxes than Enron did its last few years, and
I am barely above the poverty line.

I like this idea very much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
12. I've never understood the whole
campaign donations="free speech" logic. Lobbying, yeah, but (basically) bribing candidates/elected officials is the same?
:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Gramma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. I love it! Send this idea to your Congressperson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
8. Good Luck with this Supreme Court...
to them any restrictions on spending is considered a violation of freedom of speech. No way Slick Roberts, Fat Tony, Slimy Scalito and Conflict Of Interest Thomas will rule against Citizen United and Kennedy is in their pocket as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reformist2 Donating Member (998 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
9. Only *people* should spend money on elections. No money from corporations at all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
10. Excellant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC