CFR has passed -- Thank You!

[obfusciatrist]

*Originally posted by Narile *
**

And why not? Corporations and unions also have a vested interest in how the goverment is run, and should have a voice. If your problem is that corporations and unions have a much greater voice than the common people, don’t outlaw their contributions, require full disclosure. As it is, if you do outlaw a union or corporation from contributing, all you will do is drive it under the table.

Because corporations and unions are not citizens. Elections are about citizens. I have no problem with the inequality of power. Bill Gates could give all of his money to Ted Kennedy for all I care. Government is a contract among the citizens.

China also has a vested interest in how our government is run, but we don’t let them play either.

[furt]

And in a related story, legions of lawyers lined up to look at the final version of the bill, saying, “We can’t wait to get to work finding the loopholes in this one. It’ll take us oh, maybe four years.”

[andros]

I guess “election process” would be more appropriate to what I mean.

Whew.

[Narile]

*Originally posted by obfusciatrist *
**

Because corporations and unions are not citizens. Elections are about citizens. I have no problem with the inequality of power. Bill Gates could give all of his money to Ted Kennedy for all I care. Government is a contract among the citizens.

China also has a vested interest in how our government is run, but we don’t let them play either. **

Actually, considering how many accusations about China giving money to political parties under the table through proxies occured in the last two elections…

That said; political parties are not citizens either, do you have a problem with the fact that they get to decide which members get how much money, and from that control, which platforms the person should vote for? I am not saying that corporations and unions should have a vote, but they should be allowed to invest their money as they feel is fit, as long as they have to fully disclose where that money is going. (I’d make the same requirement for the parties as well, every dime of their funds be accounted for of course.)

Another point to add to this is the fact that the media is made up of corporations, they already could be said to donate to political causes by what gets run as news and doesn’t get run and how much it is run. (I am not going to get into weither the media has a bias or a slant towards any particular party, that is a different debate. All I am pointing out is that the media has its own agenda, and it is a corporate one.) This is off course, something that can not be controlled in any meaningfull way, even if you do have full disclosure and unlimited donations from anyone or the exact opposite. How would you propose to stop this? No political adds or news?

It is a tricky problem, how do you keep it so that a third or fourth canadite can run in an honest campaign environment. Obviously, I disagree with you as to the best means of making that campaign honest.