11-06-2014, 09:54 AM
^ I know a lot of people who feel the same way, Cutz.
It's disappointing that aggressive campaign finance reform attempts end up getting killed in court. I agreed with the primary goal of the Occupy movement, though the tactics they used to spread their message and gain support detracted from the legitimacy of their message (IMO). I share their belief that corporations should not be treated as having personhood, and monetary donations are not equivalent to free speech. I wish the Supreme Court agreed.
It would be great if Independents and Libertarians (without having to hide under a GOP label and agenda) had a fair shot in elections, rather than being dwarfed by heavily funded party-candidate campaigns. I think there is a sizable portion of the US population that is progressive when it comes to social issues and conservative when it comes to fiscal issues (and varies in regards to foreign and environmental policy) -- every time those of us go to vote, it feels like casting a ballot for the lesser of two evils (or extremes, in this case). That's true for me, anyway.
The Clean Election process in Arizona is interesting to me -- more fair to all candidates in limiting campaign funding disparities. There was talk of a movement to implement Clean Elections federally, but I don't know if it went anywhere. I really hope some leader or organization can find a way to effectively challenge campaign finance laws despite opposition from the super powerful corporations, PACs, SuperPacs, and special interest groups like the NRA and pharma.
For the time being, we've got filibusters, vetoes, and Executive Action coming our way. I'm hoping that there are enough members of Congress who care as much or more about doing their jobs and serving their constituents as they do about warring with the other party to get actually get something done. Hoping.
It's disappointing that aggressive campaign finance reform attempts end up getting killed in court. I agreed with the primary goal of the Occupy movement, though the tactics they used to spread their message and gain support detracted from the legitimacy of their message (IMO). I share their belief that corporations should not be treated as having personhood, and monetary donations are not equivalent to free speech. I wish the Supreme Court agreed.
It would be great if Independents and Libertarians (without having to hide under a GOP label and agenda) had a fair shot in elections, rather than being dwarfed by heavily funded party-candidate campaigns. I think there is a sizable portion of the US population that is progressive when it comes to social issues and conservative when it comes to fiscal issues (and varies in regards to foreign and environmental policy) -- every time those of us go to vote, it feels like casting a ballot for the lesser of two evils (or extremes, in this case). That's true for me, anyway.
The Clean Election process in Arizona is interesting to me -- more fair to all candidates in limiting campaign funding disparities. There was talk of a movement to implement Clean Elections federally, but I don't know if it went anywhere. I really hope some leader or organization can find a way to effectively challenge campaign finance laws despite opposition from the super powerful corporations, PACs, SuperPacs, and special interest groups like the NRA and pharma.
For the time being, we've got filibusters, vetoes, and Executive Action coming our way. I'm hoping that there are enough members of Congress who care as much or more about doing their jobs and serving their constituents as they do about warring with the other party to get actually get something done. Hoping.