Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Nancy Pelosi’s Call for Changing the Constitution

Posted by on Feb. 5, 2014 at 3:27 PM
Eds
  • 22 Replies

Nancy Pelosi’s Call for Changing the Constitution

Arguing it would restore democracy, two top House Democrats pushed for sweeping legislation to reverse the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Citizens United speech case, including a constitutional amendment limiting campaign contributions and instituting a taxpayer-financing system.

Nancy Pelosis Call for Changing the Constitution

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) speaks with reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 16, 2014.  (AP/J. Scott Applewhite)

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.) published an op-ed in The Washington Post Wednesday advocating for the Government by the People Act on the day it was being introduced in the House.

“We must disclose the sources of the money in our campaigns, amend the Constitution to reverse the grievous error of the Citizens United decision, reform our broken campaign finance system and empower citizens everywhere to exercise their right to vote,” Pelosi and Sarbanes wrote.

The landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United vs. Federal Elections Commission lifted restraints on political speech, allowing corporations and unions to spend money on elections as long as they do not donate directly to a candidate’s campaign. The ruling overturned much, but not all, of the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform act.

The case is named for the conservative group Citizens United, which sued when the FEC tried to block the airing of a documentary critical of Hillary Clinton during the early stages of the 2008 presidential campaign.

“We know that if the role of money in our elections were reduced and the level of civility in our politics increased, the result would be the election of more women, more minorities, more young people and more people dedicated to serving the public interest, not special interests,” Pelosi and Sarbanes wrote. “Most members of Congress would leap at the chance to fund their campaigns without having to turn to a familiar cast of big donors and entrenched interests. Today, that’s virtually impossible.”

The op-ed said that the bill has three main focuses: on a refundable $25 tax credit to encourage average citizens to deduct campaign donations on their taxes; on establishing federal matching funds for candidates for federal office who agree to limit the large donations to their own campaigns; and giving candidates the chance to get more federal tax dollars in the homestretch of the campaign.

Pelosi and Sarbanes compared a reversal of the Citizens United ruling with landmark civil rights events in American history for women and blacks.

by on Feb. 5, 2014 at 3:27 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
Billiejeens
by Ruby Member on Feb. 5, 2014 at 3:29 PM
5 moms liked this

That pesky Constitution -

It just keeps getting in the way.

denise3680
by Gold Member on Feb. 5, 2014 at 3:33 PM

I would think that not allowing money from very rich people would help?  Is it not a problem that wealthy or super wealthy donors are making all the laws or influencing how things are done in Washington anyway? 

vic270
by Vic on Feb. 5, 2014 at 5:40 PM
1 mom liked this

if nancy wants it done watch out.......what nancy wants nancy gets

29again
by Gold Member on Feb. 5, 2014 at 7:54 PM
4 moms liked this

Does nancy think she can still win without all that big money behind her?  Or is she looking for a subtle way out of our misery?

Would this edict include union money?  They wanna look at the big donors, they need to look at the unions, too.

143myboys9496
by Gold Member on Feb. 5, 2014 at 9:55 PM

The columns are "total" "individual" "PAC" this is for Nancy.

Top 5 Contributors, 1989 - 2014

Gallo Winery$135,500      $135,500       $0

American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees


$121,000       $3,500     $117,500

Akin, Gump et al


$102,300      $64,000       $38,300
National Assn of Realtors$98,600       $0       $98,600
United Auto Workers$92,000   

     

 $0



      $92,000


Quoting 29again:

Does nancy think she can still win without all that big money behind her?  Or is she looking for a subtle way out of our misery?

Would this edict include union money?  They wanna look at the big donors, they need to look at the unions, too.

Top 5 Industries, 1989 - 2014

Lawyers/Law Firms$1,018,492      $699,617

       

$318,875

Health Professionals


$959,600    $110,800        $848,800

Securities & Investment


$875,500    $550,200        $325,300
Real Estate$772,503    $466,728        $305,775
Transportation Unions$673,800     $2,100  

       

$671,700

143myboys9496
by Gold Member on Feb. 5, 2014 at 9:56 PM
4 moms liked this

we all know why....

Quoting vic270:

if nancy wants it done watch out.......what nancy wants nancy gets


vic270
by Vic on Feb. 6, 2014 at 6:33 AM
1 mom liked this

 if they keep going like they are now they are going to run out of taxpayers.

Quoting 143myboys9496:

we all know why....

Quoting vic270:

if nancy wants it done watch out.......what nancy wants nancy gets


 

143myboys9496
by Gold Member on Feb. 6, 2014 at 6:37 AM

Not when you raise minimum wage and effectively lower the bar for middle class. They'll just be tappin' more people with less.

Lowering standards isn't generally a good thing.

Quoting vic270:

 if they keep going like they are now they are going to run out of taxpayers.

Quoting 143myboys9496:

we all know why....

Quoting vic270:

if nancy wants it done watch out.......what nancy wants nancy gets




denise3680
by Gold Member on Feb. 6, 2014 at 6:53 AM

 I have to ask, why would paying people a decent wage to even get by lowering standards?  I guess I just do not understand what you guys are looking for in personal responsibility?  would it not make it easier for people to pay their bills or become more independent if every job became important.  Each position supplies another, each h=job has a purpose even down to the person who sweeps the streets for a living.  Isn't that what the purpose of paying taxes is, to get everyone to pay their fair share and take the burden of that to a smaller and smaller group of people? 

Quoting 143myboys9496:

Not when you raise minimum wage and effectively lower the bar for middle class. They'll just be tappin' more people with less.

Lowering standards isn't generally a good thing.

Quoting vic270:

 if they keep going like they are now they are going to run out of taxpayers.

Quoting 143myboys9496:

we all know why....

Quoting vic270:

if nancy wants it done watch out.......what nancy wants nancy gets


 


 

Billiejeens
by Ruby Member on Feb. 6, 2014 at 7:52 AM
3 moms liked this

 Maybe I am misunderstanding your last question, but no, the idea is to "take the burden" of taxes to a larger and larger group of people.

We don't need higher taxes - we need a higher number of tax payers.

Everyone needs to have skin in the game.

Everyone needs to be involved and care where the money goes.

As for the first part - every job is important - but not equally important.

Quoting denise3680:

 I have to ask, why would paying people a decent wage to even get by lowering standards?  I guess I just do not understand what you guys are looking for in personal responsibility?  would it not make it easier for people to pay their bills or become more independent if every job became important.  Each position supplies another, each h=job has a purpose even down to the person who sweeps the streets for a living.  Isn't that what the purpose of paying taxes is, to get everyone to pay their fair share and take the burden of that to a smaller and smaller group of people? 

Quoting 143myboys9496:

Not when you raise minimum wage and effectively lower the bar for middle class. They'll just be tappin' more people with less.

Lowering standards isn't generally a good thing.

Quoting vic270:

 if they keep going like they are now they are going to run out of taxpayers.

Quoting 143myboys9496:

we all know why....

Quoting vic270:

if nancy wants it done watch out.......what nancy wants nancy gets


 


 

 

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)