Political Book Summaries, Reviews and Opinions

Political Book Summaries, Reviews and Opinions

Protecting America’s Sovereignty from Foreign Intervention Act


In a stunning reversal of the nation’s federal campaign finance laws, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Thursday that as an exercise of free speech, corporations, labor unions and other groups can directly spend on political campaigns.

Democrats, I don’t like you all very much. I don’t like your welfare mentality and I don’t like your cap-and-trade mentality and I don’t like your Government-can-fix-anything mentality. But I’m going to try and help you all out here. The Republicans are going against their conservative roots on this one, so I want to help you fight it. You already have the policy right, we have to prevent Corporations from overpowering the US elections. That’s the policy. Policy matters. But as Ron Paul says, eventually you need a politician to walk out in front of the people and make that policy make sense to the people and get the people behind the policy. So here’s some help on the politics.

 Write a bill, name it well, perhaps the: Protecting America’s Sovereignty from Foreign Intervention Act

That bill will define Intervention to specifically mean campaign contributions or political spending. They can still have lobbyists, but those lobbyists can’t buy votes with fat wallets. A company will be considered foreign if they have any of the following:
  1. Foreign stock holders
  2. Foreign debt holders
  3. Foreign decision makers (anything from mid-level management up to CEO’s or board members)

 

Do you want Toyota deciding our elections? I sure as hell don't.

 Policy-wise, you may have to patch up a few holes. But the bill sells itself. Just keep saying “We don’t want Japan’s Toyota deciding who wins our elections. We don’t want the European Union’s Airbus dictating our labor and manufacturing laws. We don’t want China’s Dongfeng Corporation to dictate American foreign policy. Democrats will fight this infringement of America’s sovereignty and keep these foreign companies out of our politics.” And the American people will get lined up behind you.

 This won’t fix all the problems, you’ll still have some corporations making trouble. But this bill will prevent most of problems, will bloody up the fake-conservatives who thinking twisting the constitution is okay as long as it gets them money, and after winning this, you’ll be able to write and pass the Protecting America’s Sovereignty from Big Corporate Intervention Act sometime next year. Not as easy to sell, but still easy enough.

 It’s your ball Democrats. Let’s see if you can win one for the Constitution.

Advertisements

4 responses to “Protecting America’s Sovereignty from Foreign Intervention Act

  1. writerdood January 22, 2010 at 11:02 am

    Good point. That’s a tactical way to tackle it. I hope they can find some way to address this issue. As I see it, it’s the American people who are shafted by this decision, and the politicians and corporations who benefit, regardless of party. Yes, Republicans probably benefit more, but regardless, the entire thing is so insane that it makes me suspect that the Supreme Court is full of absolute morons who have no clue as to what effect they have on the country.

    Frankly, I’m pissed, and I largely blame Bush for his two appointees.

    “Congress passed the Tillman Act in 1907 banning corporations from donating money directly to federal candidates. Though that prohibition still stands, the same can’t be said for much of the century-long effort that followed to separate politics from corporate money.”

    • The BookGuy January 24, 2010 at 10:54 pm

      The fact that republicans will gain financially from this is the only reason they aren’t against it. And that’s a horrible horrible shameful thing. 😦 I really use to like McCain. He should be out screaming about this. He’s barely squeeking. 😦

  2. Timmy K January 22, 2010 at 2:00 pm

    Why exactly are the conservatives going against their roots?

    This is a constitutional decision and can’t be overturned without an amendment right? I believe your right about the foreign stuff… that should definitely be in there and perhaps an amendment should occur here too, as the founding fathers could never have imagined a presidential election being bought off.

    • The BookGuy January 24, 2010 at 10:52 pm

      It goes against conservative roots for reasons.

      1. Almost a hundred years of precident leads in one direction. A change of this proportion should be done through congress, not the courts. This is the definition of an activist judiciary.
      2. Conservatives are suppose to respect the constitution as it was, not as we want it to be. Liberals believe more along the “living constitution” idea. The constitution did not making corporations people, so the court shouldn’t rule that they are. It should require a constitutional ammendment to give corporations the rights of people.
      3. Allowing foreign organizations to have a dramatic and overpowering hand in our politics is horrible anti-sovereign rights. Obama could get on his knees and grovel to every king on earth and not damage our sovereignty as much as this decision does.

      A constitutional ammendment? Right now? I can’t see congress agreeing about what to have for lunch. Let alone an ammedment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: