dayman Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 (edited) Probably just worded something like "Congress can regulate the financing of political campaigns" ... and let the specifics go from there up to Congress. Edited June 28, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) Why? So labor unions can contribute end without end amen and corporations can't? Unions are people but corporations aren't? If there were a detente on this point, that would be something. ON EDIT: Not something that should be in the Constitution, but it would be something. As it stands, neither side will relent because the other side won't put their knife down first. Edited June 28, 2012 by UConn James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 28, 2012 Author Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) Why? So labor unions can contribute end without end amen and corporations can't? Unions are people but corporations aren't? If there were a detente on this point, I would. But as it stands, neither side will relent because the other side won't put their knife down first. The amendment would allow them to regulate campaign finance. In other words, regulate what you want as well if Congress so chooses. The specifics would be left to the future...point is they would be able to. Edited June 28, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 The amendment would allow them to regulate campaign finance. In other words, regulate what you want as well if Congress so chooses. The specifics would be left to the future...point is they would be able to. Phase I: Constitutional Amendment Phase II: Phase III: Profit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 No. Something like that has no businesses being in the Constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 The Amendment process is not there to legislate the current cause-of-the-day. Did we not learn this lesson already with prohibition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) Funny how all of a sudden liberals cry foul now that the tables have turned yet when Obama for the first time in US history rejected public funds........ Crickets Edited June 28, 2012 by WorldTraveller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Give a politician the right to decide if, or when, I can donate MY OWN money??? or what's left after they get their fair share.... Especially with only this as a means to keep them in check... "Congress can regulate the financing of political campaigns" no.... not today.... not tomorrow.... not while I'm still alive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 28, 2012 Author Share Posted June 28, 2012 Give a politician the right to decide if, or when, I can donate MY OWN money??? or what's left after they get their fair share.... Especially with only this as a means to keep them in check... no.... not today.... not tomorrow.... not while I'm still alive... Is this your Ted Nugent moment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Ted's learning.... I think he would admit, he has a long way to go if he want to make the team... He's got all the tools, and he's obviously, a fan favorite. Ted puts in the extra time with his positional coaches, showing he wants to be part of this team. We're in training camp now, and I expect him to graduate on time in July... We'll see yet if that carries over in to game times in November.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buff_bills4ever Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 No politician would ever support an amendment that did not favor him or hurt challengers. Minus a populist revolution and a complete redraw of the Constitution, no, Citizen's United should stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 28, 2012 Author Share Posted June 28, 2012 Ted's learning.... I think he would admit, he has a long way to go if he want to make the team... He's got all the tools, and he's obviously, a fan favorite. Ted puts in the extra time with his positional coaches, showing he wants to be part of this team. We're in training camp now, and I expect him to graduate on time in July... We'll see yet if that carries over in to game times in November.. lol sufficiently strange response, touche Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Why? So labor unions can contribute end without end amen and non-media owningcorporations can't? Unions are people but corporations aren't? If there were a detente on this point, that would be something. ON EDIT: Not something that should be in the Constitution, but it would be something. As it stands, neither side will relent because the other side won't put their knife down first. Fixed it for you. In a world full of bad ideas, a constitutional limit on political speech, though it probably wouldn't be king, would have to be in contention for being the king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 No. Something like that has no businesses being in the Constitution. No kidding. WTF? Since we're up for putting stupid **** in there, maybe we can just start adding things like favorite recipes or top 10 lists to the Constitution as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted June 28, 2012 Author Share Posted June 28, 2012 So all you guys think we would not benefit from being able to control some of the money in politics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 So all you guys think we would not benefit from being able to control some of the money in politics? Do you think the U.S. would be a better country if it was run more like Venezuela? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 So all you guys think we would not benefit from being able to control some of the money in politics? No, we think you're an idiot for wanting to make it an amendment to the Constitution. That was your subject. Not whether or not we need campaign finance changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 I know, let's have a constitutional amendment banning soft drinks in excess of 16 ozs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Do you think the U.S. would be a better country if it was run more like Venezuela? Not nearly leftist enough for NewBills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) Why? So labor unions can contribute end without end amen and corporations can't? Unions are people but corporations aren't? If there were a detente on this point, that would be something. ON EDIT: Not something that should be in the Constitution, but it would be something. As it stands, neither side will relent because the other side won't put their knife down first. That's why all the affecting laws need to be stricken and we need to start over. Editing won't fix the problem. I know, let's have a constitutional amendment banning soft drinks in excess of 16 ozs. Agreed- you can't legislate intelligence. Edited June 28, 2012 by Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts