Campaign Donor Disclosure Bill

[dayman]

I heard it on the radio.

 

 

 

 

 

You SOB

 

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3364/text

 

^text^

[DC Tom]

You SOB

 

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3364/text

 

^text^

 

You earned that one.

 

I was just about to post it. That's the one I found.

[WorldTraveller]

If the chamber of commerce doesn't support it, it's bad for the American people? C'mon now.

 

 

 

 

Can you link up that text? And the filibuster just needs to be gutted in some way it's ridiculous. Probably won't happen until the Democrats are in the minority but I'll support it then just as much as I would now.

 

Despite how unbelievably shallow this campaign had been just up until the last couple days, off shoring and outsourcing is akin to gravity. Attempting to alter policy through punitive measure of taxation to impede how a business conducts business can only lead to one thing and that is a result through the laws of unintended consequences. Off shoring and outsourcing is a necessary evil for certain businesses to grow, specially businesses catering to foreign customers, where it's much more logical to set up manufacturing hubs abroad. That is what off shoring is about.

 

If you want to make manufacturing more attractive at home, you simply the corporate tax code. Let's face it, cheap labor and increased technology, robotics and software has sharply increased productivity, which ultimately spells the demise of a vibrant manufacturing labor force.

 

This bill had nothing to do with improving this economy and everything to do with the presidential elections, which by default, makes it a ****ty piece of legislation

[meazza]

Despite how unbelievably shallow this campaign had been just up until the last couple days, off shoring and outsourcing is akin to gravity. Attempting to alter policy through punitive measure of taxation to impede how a business conducts business can only lead to one thing and that is a result through the laws of unintended consequences. Off shoring and outsourcing is a necessary evil for certain businesses to grow, specially businesses catering to foreign customers, where it's much more logical to set up manufacturing hubs abroad. That is what off shoring is about.

 

If you want to make manufacturing more attractive at home, you simply the corporate tax code. Let's face it, cheap labor and increased technology, robotics and software has sharply increased productivity, which ultimately spells the demise of a vibrant manufacturing labor force.

 

This bill had nothing to do with improving this economy and everything to do with the presidential elections, which by default, makes it a ****ty piece of legislation

 

Is there ever a period when a decision/legislation is not related to some sort of election.

 

Not only is there the re-election in 2012 but also the mid-term elections so effectively, for 6 out of the 8 years, everyone is campaigning. How the !@#$ does anything ever get done?

[dayman]

Despite how unbelievably shallow this campaign had been just up until the last couple days, off shoring and outsourcing is akin to gravity. Attempting to alter policy through punitive measure of taxation to impede how a business conducts business can only lead to one thing and that is a result through the laws of unintended consequences. Off shoring and outsourcing is a necessary evil for certain businesses to grow, specially businesses catering to foreign customers, where it's much more logical to set up manufacturing hubs abroad. That is what off shoring is about.

 

If you want to make manufacturing more attractive at home, you simply the corporate tax code. Let's face it, cheap labor and increased technology, robotics and software has sharply increased productivity, which ultimately spells the demise of a vibrant manufacturing labor force.

 

This bill had nothing to do with improving this economy and everything to do with the presidential elections, which by default, makes it a ****ty piece of legislation

 

I'm not an offshore maniac I get it. But credits for insourcing to encourage people to bring them back, and elimination deductions for outsourcing is fine by my book.

 

And the campaign disclosure is something I greatly believe in.

 

Every bill is political these days. From both sides. 2 weeks repealing the ACA when everyone knows it isn't happening? POlitical. These two bills...political? Sure. But guess what...these are sensible bills. No way the Average American voter disproves of either of these bills. I like the Jobs bill sounds good enough I LOVE the Disclosure bill...hence I hate that the GOP blocks them. Does that make me shallow? No...I'm not just supporting Obama by complaining here is all I'm saying...I know you think I'm an Obamabot...but I like these Bills.

[WorldTraveller]

I'm not an offshore maniac I get it. But credits for insourcing to encourage people to bring them back, and elimination deductions for outsourcing is fine by my book.

 

And the campaign disclosure is something I greatly believe in.

 

Every bill is political these days. From both sides. 2 weeks repealing the ACA when everyone knows it isn't happening? POlitical. These two bills...political? Sure. But guess what...these are sensible bills. No way the Average American voter disproves of either of these bills. I like the Jobs bill sounds good enough I LOVE the Disclosure bill...hence I hate that the GOP blocks them. Does that make me shallow? No...I'm not just supporting Obama by complaining here is all I'm saying...I know you think I'm an Obamabot...but I like these Bills.

I've always been a believer of incentive based policies, and a huge detractor of punitive policies, specially those born through populism.

[dayman]

I've always been a believer of incentive based policies, and a huge detractor of punitive policies, specially those born through populism.

 

 

It denys deductions for outsourcing expenses. We could go back forth whether or not that is really punitive. But it's not the strongest argument IMO that this bill is somehow an overly populist power grab. And I still am livid over the disclosure deal and particularly McCain whom I like sometimes (never when he talks Syria).

 

What they should do is say give us our disclosure bill which is great, give us our outsourcing jobs bill, and we will give you the extension over 250K. 3 political bills, 1 compromise. The nation wins on all 3 IMO. Congress approval goes up. Win, win, win, win. America, Congress, Romney and Obama.

[TakeYouToTasker]

I'm not an offshore maniac I get it. But credits for insourcing to encourage people to bring them back, and elimination deductions for outsourcing is fine by my book.

 

And the campaign disclosure is something I greatly believe in.

 

Every bill is political these days. From both sides. 2 weeks repealing the ACA when everyone knows it isn't happening? POlitical. These two bills...political? Sure. But guess what...these are sensible bills. No way the Average American voter disproves of either of these bills. I like the Jobs bill sounds good enough I LOVE the Disclosure bill...hence I hate that the GOP blocks them. Does that make me shallow? No...I'm not just supporting Obama by complaining here is all I'm saying...I know you think I'm an Obamabot...but I like these Bills.

The spending necessary for social democratic policy requires a Keynesian economic system. A Keynesian economic system requires the exportation of inflation to maintain any downward pressure on prices. Do you know the two ways in which inflation can be exported?

[dayman]

Seriously though I would like to know here let us play Congress. I'll be NewBills (D) in this scenario and you all PPP ®. Let's pretend I have Presidency and Senate and you all have House and the ability to stop me from doing anything you want in the Senate. We're gridlocked. There's an election.

 

I propose...let's extend the Bush Cuts 1 year for everyone. Lets pass the Disclosure bill. Lets pass the Jobs Home bill.

 

Counter offer?

[TakeYouToTasker]

My counter offer is: answer the question I just asked you.

[Rob's House]

Quoting Scalia on the subject from his interview last night discussing Citizens United:

 

SCALIA: Oh, I certainly think not. I think, as I think the framers thought, that the more speech, the better. Now, you -- you are entitled to know where the speech is coming from, you know, information as -- as to who contributed what. That's something else.

 

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1207/18/pmt.01.html

So now you're a Scalia guy?

 

Scalia, right? The guy who said the ACA is unconstitutional any way you play it?

 

Just to clarify, I'm not saying it's unconstitutional. I'd have to read the bill and review the case law to give you a definitive opinion on the ultimate decision. But the fact that they're discussing it shows that it's not a foregone conclusion.

[dayman]

So now you're a Scalia guy?

 

Scalia, right? The guy who said the ACA is unconstitutional any way you play it?

 

Just to clarify, I'm not saying it's unconstitutional. I'd have to read the bill and review the case law to give you a definitive opinion on the ultimate decision. But the fact that they're discussing it shows that it's not a foregone conclusion.

 

 

I'm saying it would have the votes for sure. The majority in Citizens United talked about it as the remedy to the dissents problems. So we know Kennedy would vote for it. As there...Scalia would. The 4 liberals would. That's 6 right there. And Roberts probably would that's 7. Thomas? Thomas would as well IMO. Alito? Doesn't matter but IMO this is a unanimous decision and in any event there's 6 votes you can take to the bank.

[WorldTraveller]

Seriously though I would like to know here let us play Congress. I'll be NewBills (D) in this scenario and you all PPP ®. Let's pretend I have Presidency and Senate and you all have House and the ability to stop me from doing anything you want in the Senate. We're gridlocked. There's an election.

 

I propose...let's extend the Bush Cuts 1 year for everyone. Lets pass the Disclosure bill. Lets pass the Jobs Home bill.

 

Counter offer?

I'd say, ok to the Bush tax cuts and no to the other two.

[DC Tom]

Seriously though I would like to know here let us play Congress. I'll be NewBills (D) in this scenario and you all PPP ®. Let's pretend I have Presidency and Senate and you all have House and the ability to stop me from doing anything you want in the Senate. We're gridlocked. There's an election.

 

I propose...let's extend the Bush Cuts 1 year for everyone. Lets pass the Disclosure bill. Lets pass the Jobs Home bill.

 

Counter offer?

 

Wait...am I answering as me, or as a Republican?

 

Because as a House Republican, the answer's easy: I take the tax cuts, and kill Disclosure and Jobs Home. Just because I'm a Republican.

 

But as me...my counter-offer is: kill Disclosure and Jobs, and I'll let you roll back the tax cuts.

[WorldTraveller]

Wait...am I answering as me, or as a Republican?

 

Because as a House Republican, the answer's easy: I take the tax cuts, and kill Disclosure and Jobs Home. Just because I'm a Republican.

 

But as me...my counter-offer is: kill Disclosure and Jobs, and I'll let you roll back the tax cuts.

I've been a big proponent of killing the Bush tax cuts across the board once the economy gets on solid footing, and we aren't nearly there yet.

[TakeYouToTasker]

I'm saying it would have the votes for sure. The majority in Citizens United talked about it as the remedy to the dissents problems. So we know Kennedy would vote for it. As there...Scalia would. The 4 liberals would. That's 6 right there. And Roberts probably would that's 7. Thomas? Thomas would as well IMO. Alito? Doesn't matter but IMO this is a unanimous decision and in any event there's 6 votes you can take to the bank.

So you aren't going to answer my question then?

[dayman]

Tasker if you have a problem with whatever the outsourcing bills was feel free to just come out and say it btw.

 

 

Anyway I heard and interesting take on some of the money/politics dynamic the other day. Guy talking about what politicians fear is not so much lack of general funding as that will be there for established guys...but everyone is afraid most of all that someone will dump a few million in the month or so before the election to sabotage them. So they need to ready knowing that they have someone ready to "protect" them by countering if that happens with a few million in that emergency time to keep them from losing a contested election. So it become not only buying a politician...but the politician then actively represents interests BEFORE being bought to make sure they can be protected. It's like the mob. It's almost a protectionist mentality.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Tasker if you have a problem with whatever the outsourcing bills was feel free to just come out and say it btw.

 

 

Anyway I heard and interesting take on some of the money/politics dynamic the other day. Guy talking about what politicians fear is not so much lack of general funding as that will be there for established guys...but everyone is afraid most of all that someone will dump a few million in the month or so before the election to sabotage them. So they need to ready knowing that they have someone ready to "protect" them by countering if that happens with a few million in that emergency time to keep them from losing a contested election. So it become not only buying a politician...but the politician then actively represents interests BEFORE being bought to make sure they can be protected. It's like the mob. It's almost a protectionist mentality.

Ya' know, I have genuinely found you to be a thinking individual. Why are you now challenging that belief with intellectual cowardice?

[dayman]

Ya' know, I have genuinely found you to be a thinking individual. Why are you now challenging that belief with intellectual cowardice?

 

LOL you have been all but begging me to engage in what I considered at the time of your comment to be a typical grande ideologue discussion when I asked a point blank negotiation question on policy. But now I'm acknowledging that question and saying "go ahead, let us hear it." So...go ahead. If you demand a guess as to what you are getting at I would say maybe that by exporting and becoming more entrenched with other countries they rely on us and our own inflation/downfall becomes something they can't tolerate either? But I really don't know that's why I'm saying...go ahead. I don't even care I'm not an economist if you have something to say that refutes my impulse to think that our tax breaks should go to jobs coming in and not jobs going out then...by all means...flip me on that issue if you can. This is a discussion board.

[dayman]

BTW whenever you get around to it this will probably be a campaign issue, this bill. So I am being serious when I say if there is some great point I should consider I haven't...I'm all ears.