Saturday, January 28, 2017

It's not just the money channeled to our governmental employees and representatives. Their methods reach every aspect of our society feeding their own story line with no regard except to further their own interests and goals.                    RSG

Frightened by Donald Trump? You don’t know the half of it
Many of his staffers are from an opaque corporate misinformation network. We must understand this if we are to have any hope of fighting back against them

 Former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, like other members of Trump’s team, came from a group called Americans for Prosperity. 
Yes, Donald Trump’s politics are incoherent. But those who surround him know just what they want, and his lack of clarity enhances their power. To understand what is coming, we need to understand who they are. I know all too well, because I have spent the past 15 years fighting them.
Over this time, I have watched as tobacco, coal, oil, chemicals and biotech companies have poured billions of dollars into an international misinformation machine composed of thinktanks, bloggers and fake citizens’ groups. Its purpose is to portray the interests of billionaires as the interests of the common people, to wage war against trade unions and beat down attempts to regulate business and tax the very rich. Now the people who helped run this machine are shaping the government.
 Trump’s climate denial is just one of the forces that point towards war

I first encountered the machine when writing about climate change. The fury and loathing directed at climate scientists and campaigners seemed incomprehensible until I realised they were fake: the hatred had been paid for. The bloggers and institutes whipping up this anger were funded by oil and coal companies.
Among those I clashed with was Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). The CEI calls itself a thinktank, but looks to me like a corporate lobbying group. It is not transparent about its funding, but we now know it has received $2m from ExxonMobilmore than $4m from a group called the Donors Trust (which represents various corporations and billionaires), $800,000 from groups set up by the tycoons Charles and David Koch, and substantial sums from coal, tobacco and pharmaceutical companies.

For years, Ebell and the CEI have attacked efforts to limit climate change, through lobbying, lawsuits and campaigns. An advertisement released by the institute had the punchline “Carbon dioxide: they call it pollution. We call it life.”
It has sought to eliminate funding for environmental education, lobbied against the Endangered Species Act, harried climate scientists and campaigned in favour of mountaintop removal by coal companies. In 2004, Ebell sent a memo to one of George W Bush’s staffers calling for the head of the Environmental Protection Agency to be sacked. Where is Ebell now? Oh – leading Trump’s transition team for the Environmental Protection Agency.

 Former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, like other members of Trump’s team, came from a group called Americans for Prosperity. Photograph: UPI/Barcroft Images
Charles and David Koch – who for years have funded extreme pro-corporate politics – might not have been enthusiasts for Trump’s candidacy, but their people were all over his campaign. Until June, Trump’s campaign manager was Corey Lewandowski, who like other members of Trump’s team came from a group called Americans for Prosperity (AFP).

Donald Trump's first 100 days as president – daily updates

This purports to be a grassroots campaign, but it was founded and funded by the Koch brothers. It set up the first Tea Party Facebook page and organised the first Tea Party events. With a budget of hundreds of millions of dollars, AFP has campaigned ferociously on issues that coincide with the Koch brothers’ commercial interests in oil, gas, minerals, timber and chemicals.

In Michigan, it helped force through the “right to work bill”, in pursuit of what AFP’s local director called “taking the unions out at the knees”. It has campaigned nationwide against action on climate change. It has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into unseating the politicians who won’t do its bidding and replacing them with those who will.

I could fill this newspaper with the names of Trump staffers who have emerged from such groups: people such as Doug Domenech, from the Texas Public Policy Foundation, funded among others by the Koch brothers, Exxon and the Donors Trust; Barry Bennett, whose Alliance for America’s Future (now called One Nation) refused to disclose its donors when challenged; and Thomas Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, funded by Exxon and others. This is to say nothing of Trump’s own crashing conflicts of interest. Trump promised to “drain the swamp” of the lobbyists and corporate stooges working in Washington. But it looks as if the only swamps he’ll drain will be real ones, as his team launches its war on the natural world.

Understandably, there has been plenty of coverage of the racists and white supremacists empowered by Trump’s victory. But, gruesome as they are, they’re peripheral to the policies his team will develop. It’s almost comforting, though, to focus on them, for at least we know who they are and what they stand for. By contrast, to penetrate the corporate misinformation machine is to enter a world of mirrors. Spend too long trying to understand it, and the hyporeality vortex will inflict serious damage on your state of mind.

Don’t imagine that other parts of the world are immune. Corporate-funded thinktanks and fake grassroots groups are now everywhere. The fake news we should be worried about is not stories invented by Macedonian teenagers about Hillary Clinton selling arms to Islamic State, but the constant feed of confected scares about unions, tax and regulation drummed up by groups that won’t reveal their interests.

The less transparent they are, the more airtime they receive. The organisation Transparify runs an annual survey of thinktanks. This year’s survey reveals that in the UK only four thinktanks – the Adam Smith Institute, Centre for Policy Studies, Institute of Economic Affairs and Policy Exchange – “still consider it acceptable to take money from hidden hands behind closed doors”. And these are the ones that are all over the media.

When the Institute of Economic Affairs, as it so often does, appears on the BBC to argue against regulating tobacco, shouldn’t we be told that it has been funded by tobacco companies since 1963There’s a similar pattern in the US: the most vocal groups tend to be the most opaque.

As usual, the left and centre (myself included) are beating ourselves up about where we went wrong. There are plenty of answers, but one of them is that we have simply been outspent. Not by a little, but by orders of magnitude. A few billion dollars spent on persuasion buys you all the politics you want. Genuine campaigners, working in their free time, simply cannot match a professional network staffed by thousands of well-paid, unscrupulous people.
You cannot confront a power until you know what it is. Our first task in this struggle is to understand what we face. Only then can we work out what to do.

Thursday, March 10, 2016

We Don't Have Free Speech Annotated Table of Contents

Annotated Table of Contents
We Don’t Have Free Speech blogsite

We chose a blog as opposed to a website because none of what is presented here is a finished product or done deal. It is a work in progress and can only have a meaningful impact if both its creation and implementation become widely shared. We hope that means you. If you find truth in any of these ideas, we invite you to join a dialogue, suggest additions, editions and deletions, and to make this work  a part of your healing work in a badly broken world. May it be so.

Best summary of the proposed “Recover our Democracy Act;” its Constitutional basis; removing purported legal objections, public financing of elections, limits on campaign contributions, public funding of federal elections, preprogrammed campaign website, redefining a bribe and much more
Cut and paste text to share by electronic media to spread the word on our plan
The Levy Analogy: My Story, Seeing the power of Big $$$
Our appointment being ignored while lobbyists immediately enter our Congressman’s office
The Levy Analogy: Background 
Being on the outside: Explaining the meaning of our logo…the corrupting influence of Big Money
GET BIG $$$ out of politics NOW
Political contributions, Citizens United Supreme Court Decision,  “We don’t have free speech. We can’t afford it,” our solution is an act of Congress,
Redefining a bribe
“Backdoor money in politics, quid pro quo,  “anything of material value offered or given to, or received and accepted by any candidate, incumbent or governmental employee under any circumstance shall be defined as a bribe,” penalties defined for candidates and government employees.
Introduction: Free, Corporate and Bought Speech
Our early commentaries: Free speech is fundamental to democracy, different views, uses and limitations of free speech, public financing of elections, fair and balanced media coverage

"Free" Speech or "Bought" Speech
Original free speech: freedom to speak our mind,  power to “buy” both the “content” and the “delivery” of “free” speech,  "personhood" of corporations, Supreme Court and  Citizens United, ownership of the media, points of view,  political advertising, educational content, bought speech,…

Is the Problem Big Government or Big Business?
http://wedonthavefreespeech.blogspot.com/2010/02/is-problem-big-government-or-big.html
Trickle down economics, tax reductions, income disparity, deregulation, power by changing belief systems, abuses, distortions and lies, is it regulation or just bad regulation?, affording governmental programs and high taxes, millennia of struggle by the rich to retain control vs. democracy,

Right & Left Unite in Opposition to Unlimited Corporate Spending on Elections
http://wedonthavefreespeech.blogspot.com/2010/02/richt-left-unite-in-opposition-to.html
 85% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 76% of Republicans opposed Citizens United

Definitions Relevant to "Free Speech"
Humans speaking their mind without fear, means of extending the reach of speech [meida], bought speech, literally “free” speech decoupled from money, power of the media, corporate personhood, limitations of free speech, campaigns and political speech, alternative communications for elections: public financing, freedom of the Internet….
Corporate campaign contributions clearly buy influence
Figures on campaign contributions given by largest lobbying corporations [6+ years old = pre Supepr PACs]
We Don’t Have Free Speech; We can't afford it
One of our earliest posts:We don't have free speech that has meaningful access to our own representatives. Our logo, our slogan, our chants, young adults, spreading the word on the Internet, Obama’s election, making videos,
[Very rough draft] Proposed Legislation: Redefining Free Speech
http://wedonthavefreespeech.blogspot.com/2010/02/proposed-legislation-redefining-free.html
Largely unedited, free associated ideas on framing the legislation
[Draft only]Legislation to Provide a National Elections Website
Free public website designed and formatted to conduct campaigns for office and public issues , FEC provided bank account, and credit cards , campaign accounting system and regulations, partial design specifications, real time public review access…
[Draft only]Legislation: Free Speech & the Internet
the most logical public space to allow the free flow of information on issues of public interest
Constitutional Issues for the Legally Minded

understanding the power of corporations as a means of amassing power and money, the founding fathers originally rejected the existance of corporations,” corporations are not mentioned in the Constitution and have no protected rights; therefore, Congress may limit or abolish corporations as deemed necessary for the public good. Growth of corporate power, personhood of corporations and personal rights attributed to corporations , theory of 14th amendment [due process] applies to corporations,

Monday, March 7, 2016

To all who want Big $$$ out of our politics, 
Re: please help spread the word by sending this link out to others.

For five years I have been refining the following ideas for removing Big $$$ from our politics. It is now published on my blog site "We Don’t Have Free Speech; We Can’t Afford It" in the form of a draft speech offered to Senator Bernie Sanders. [follow link at bottom to read it.] I believe with all my heart that now is a unique time and Bernie Sanders is perhaps the only person who can carry this effort to fruition. As the primary progresses, the window of time for this to happen is very narrow.

"Part one” of the draft speech is proposed for his use and delivery [with additions and changes as he may see fit]. I ask if you would take a few minutes to review the content attached and, if you agree, that you, your contacts and/or your organizations  would lend your name and support to quickly help bring it to Bernie’s attention and, if he accepts it, to the attention of the nation -- hopefully making it a transforming power in this election. We are still revising part two and will forward it to you in a few days.

If you agree to support Bernie or just the legislation itself, please email me.

Thank you for your consideration,
Richard S. Galloway, founder WeDontHaveFreeSpeech@outlook.com   

 Link to Part One of Speech
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=5087701674200938543#editor/target=post;postID=2426563675514226165;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=0;src=postname


Annotated Table of Contents

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/sign-the-pledge-big-out?source=c.em&r_by=14960502
Insist candidates vote for a single act of Congress stating: “There is no relationship between speech and money stated or implied in the US Constitution and therefore no such relationship exists” as the basis of further reforms to limit the abuses of Big Money interests.
Best summary of the proposed “Recover our Democracy Act;” its Constitutional basis; removing purported legal objections, public financing of elections, limits on campaign contributions, public funding of federal elections, preprogrammed campaign website, redefining a bribe and much more
Cut and paste text to share by electronic media to spread the word on our plan
Our appointment being ignored while lobbyists immediately enter our Congressman’s office
Being on the outside: Explaining the meaning of our logo…the corrupting influence of Big Money
Political contributions, Citizens United Supreme Court Decision,  “We don’t have free speech. We can’t afford it,” our solution is an act of Congress,
 “Backdoor money in politics, quid pro quo,  “anything of material value offered or given to, or received and accepted by any candidate, incumbent or governmental employee under any circumstance shall be defined as a bribe,” penalties defined for candidates and government employees.
Our early commentaries: Free speech is fundamental to democracy, different views, uses and limitations of free speech, public financing of elections, fair and balanced media coverage

Original free speech: freedom to speak our mind,  power to “buy” both the “content” and the “delivery” of “free” speech,  "personhood" of corporations, Supreme Court and  Citizens United, ownership of the media, points of view,  political advertising, educational content, bought speech,…

Trickle down economics, tax reductions, income disparity, deregulation, power by changing belief systems, abuses, distortions and lies, is it regulation or just bad regulation?, affording governmental programs and high taxes, millennia of struggle by the rich to retain control vs. democracy,

 85% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 76% of Republicans opposed Citizens United

Humans speaking their mind without fear, means of extending the reach of speech [meida], bought speech, literally “free” speech decoupled from money, power of the media, corporate personhood, limitations of free speech, campaigns and political speech, alternative communications for elections: public financing, freedom of the Internet….
Figures on campaign contributions given by largest lobbying corporations [6+ years old = pre Supepr PACs]
One of our earliest posts:We don't have free speech that has meaningful access to our own representatives. Our logo, our slogan, our chants, young adults, spreading the word on the Internet, Obama’s election, making videos,
Largely unedited, free associated ideas on framing the legislation
Free public website designed and formatted to conduct campaigns for office and public issues , FEC provided bank account, and credit cards , campaign accounting system and regulations, partial design specifications, real time public review access…
the most logical public space to allow the free flow of information on issues of public interest

understanding the power of corporations as a means of amassing power and money, the founding fathers originally rejected the existence of corporations,” corporations are not mentioned in the Constitution and have no protected rights; therefore, Congress may limit or abolish corporations as deemed necessary for the public good. Growth of corporate power, personhood of corporations and personal rights attributed to corporations , theory of 14th amendment [due process] applies to corporations,

Concept speech for Bernie Sanders part one: the legislation


Dear Sanders’ Campaign,
In the hope of helping to assure his success, this concept  speech is our gift at the apparent “win or lose” turning point in the primary

A draft “How-To” speech/plan for Bernie’s campaign ……with an unexpected new path turning the corner…from ideas to concrete actions …adding new synergy…removing Big Money from politics in this year’s election…through a single act of Congress,…and how to sell it to the American voting public.


Concept Speech Begins

I[1] am calling our new plan the “Recovering Our Democracy Act.” Why? Because the way our government works today, our democracy is little more than an empty shell. Few issues unite American voters as much as the corrupting influence of big money in our politics. Success in any of the important issues crying for our attention depends on breaking the power of the top 1% to control the outcome for their selfish purposes. The deck is stacked. It’s time to end the entire way our political process is manipulated and controlled by billionaires and their Super PACs.

Throughout my campaign, the promise to fix this problem has been the central focus, and you are appropriately asking how I plan to achieve our goal. There is a huge difference between defining a problem or promising to fix it on the one hand, and actually solving it on the other.  So…Here is what I plan to do and what I am asking you to do to make this happen.

The great political philosopher John Stuart Mill once said,

Against a great evil a small remedy does not produce a small result, it produces no result at all.

Make no mistake. Our country has been hijacked by a wealthy cabal. It is not exaggeration to use  Mill’s term “ great evil” to describe it. We’re past fed up. From the right wing to the left, we feel something in our gut, but few understand the cause or the depth of the exasperation we Americans are feeling. The Washington political insiders don’t see any problems or want changes because it all works fine for them. They’re happy playing the game the way it is.


Acknowledging this gut feeling is why both Donald Trump and I are doing so well in this primary and why this is confusing and confounding to the political and media establishment. No one else is addressing the corrupting power of big money directly. But that’s as far as the similarities between Trump and I go. Despite his words that seem to identify him as being an outsider who is serious about making the necessary changes, Trump is and always will support the interests of the wealthy. His actions speak so loudly, we can’t hear a word he is saying.

My friends, nothing short of a second democratic revolution will be strong enough to change what must be changed. My plan not only identifies the real problem, but spells out what we are going  to do together starting right now to fix this vexing problem. How? I have invited colleagues from both houses to join our effort as sponsors of the “Recovering Our Democracy Act.”

The “Recovering Our Democracy Act”


The legislation’s objective is to keep the control of our government where it should be – in the hands of We the People! To achieve this requires that our legislation be comprehensive, simple and clear, readily enforceable, carry serious penalties, and to be able to stand up in the courts. We must hit all of these points for it to be effective.

Many organizations propose reversing Citizens United through a Constitutional Amendment. The amendment process is the most difficult, time consuming and expensive way to fix a problem. Unfortunately, most of their plans would not end all the ways that big money effectively buys our government. If it doesn’t, it will not solve our problem. All that money pouring through even one very small hole will soon wash away the partial limits we made.

That is why the “Recovering Our Democracy Act.” is designed to change the pivotal issue that allows the corrupting influence of money direct and indirect control of government. On the day our legislation is passed and signed into law by our President it will solve this problem immediately and completely. Let’s do this together to honor President Obama with one of the last accomplishments of his presidency fraught with obstacles and resistance.

A Congressional Act declaring “there is no connection between money and free speech stated or implied in the Constitution and therefore none exists” ends legal fiction that corporations are people and have guaranteed free speech. This opens the door to transforming how money controls our political process.

We will accomplish this by the establishing the following essential steps:

First and foremost, it is worth repeating the point almost everyone has missed: If you read the First Amendment carefully, there is no connection between money and speech stated or implied in the Constitution and therefore none exists. It really is that simple and no court can tell us it’s not so. Within the bounds set by the Constitution, only Congress has the power legislate. The Supreme Court does not have the power to “legislate from the bench” as our “strict constructionist” friends on the right so vehemently remind us. Since it’s simply true that there is no Constitutional protection, only the US Congress can regulate how money influences free speech and politics without further intervention by the Supreme Court.

Done the minute our act is signed into law by President Obama.

Second, the law declares that corporations are not people and do not have the protected right to free speech. End of discussion. This is the crux of the matter. Most of the current problem stems from the court’s attempting to balance the rights and limits of many vying “so-called free speech” interests – corporations, nonprofits, Super PACs, unions, churches, et cetera – where rights and limits must be fair and equal for all of them.

This process has become a Gordian knot of laws, regulations and court decisions which allows nuanced arguments to prevent any meaningful limitation of money in politics. This includes Citizens United’s creating the “legal fiction” of corporations as people with free speech rights. This has opened the final flood gate allowing private interests …to spend unlimited money…from unknown sources… saying whatever they want …with little or no regard for the truth…with absolutely no accountability to the will of the voters, …candidates, … or political parties.

Let me say that once more time to be sure everyone gets the point: The current Supreme Court  rulings purport to allow private interests …to spend unlimited money…from unknown sources… saying whatever they want … with little or no regard for the truth…with absolutely no accountability to the will of the voters, …candidates, … or political parties. This is just plain wrong.

The fix is much more simple than almost anyone imagined: Once the link between money and speech is totally broken, all these arcane arguments are immediately made null and void through this act without further executive, congressional or jurisprudential action saving years of litigation costing millions of dollars.  

Done the minute our act is signed into law by President Obama.

Third,  the legislation places strict limits on the amount of campaign contributions to $200 per person per campaign and only from an individual person while totally barring contributions or paid political ads by any organization.

Done the minute our act is signed into law by President Obama .

Fourth,  public funding of federal campaigns becomes the law of the land while making all other funding illegal.  We are working out the details based on the models that have been in place and working well in MaineArizonaNorth CarolinaNew Mexico, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Massachusetts [except where struck down by the Supreme Court based on the legal fiction we have now removed]. 

While Congress  cannot legislate state and local election procedures, we can make it the most reasonable path for state and local governments to follow.

Where public funding is in place, the results are amazing. Currently our representatives are wasting as much as half their time selling their souls courting large donors. By saving time and eliminating the influence of corporate bribes, candidates can turn their attention to serving the public interests as they should.
We are currently working out these details.

Finally, we address the last of the most important issues: Bribes... lavish junkets… private boxes at cultural and sporting events…and  boxes of money and other goodies channeled in secret to legislators and public employees. Everyone knows this is exactly what is happening now. In fact, in their first debate, presidential hopeful Donald Trump said clearly that this is how it works and he has used bribes to gain business advantages.  He thinks it’s just fine. It works for him.

Under current law, it is necessary [but almost impossible to prove] money or other inducements were given in order to receive a specific response. The legal term is quid pro quo, or giving this for that in return. The answer is to redefine bribery: First, outside of campaign contributions, it will be against the law under any circumstance[2] to give anything of material value of more than $100 to a candidate, elected official or public employee. Second, it is the act of giving and receiving itself which constitutes the bribe. If it can be shown someone gave and someone else took something of greater value, the mandatory verdict for both parties is “guilty as charged” and carries a mandatory prison sentence of ten years, plus additional severe fines and punishments in proportion to the bribe as deemed appropriate by the court on a case by case basis.

The current practice is totally unacceptable and must be eliminated. It is our distinct intent to leave no legal wiggle room. Do these penalties seem unreasonably harsh? Maybe the better questions is: Are they sufficiently punitive to end the long tradition of de facto bribery?  Is it then unreasonable to require our public servants to do the jobs as they are paid to do?  I think not. Their rewards are the salary, benefits and the genuine pride of public service.  If that is not enough, then they should stay out of politics. Period. What is clear is that if we don’t make conviction of bribery a virtual certainty and the punishments severe enough, the power elite will continue to do as they please and thumb their noses at us all the way to the bank. Count on it. No. We are starting today guarantee our government functions are no longer bought and paid for, hopefully before Election Day. This is what we want. This is how it always should have been. This is what we demand.

Done the minute our act is signed into law by President Obama.

Removing the old corrupt ways necessitates creating new and  better ways to finance and conduct elections. To replace the corrupt financing of elections, along with public funding, we are proposing several steps to simplify the process and level the playing field for candidates who are essentially prohibited from running currently for lack of millions of dollars of support:

All elections require the ability to perform the same functions. Therefore, a mainstay of the new electoral process will be to provide this through a national election website containing all the up-to-date information, pre-programmed functions to present the candidate’s credentials and campaign planks, blog and other social networking capabilities to receive and respond to the public, email blasts, and computing power necessary to run a campaign in the appropriate election district. This is a huge step towards leveling the playing field between candidates and significantly reducing the cost of running a competitive campaign.

We are currently working out these details.

This sight will include a campaign finance accounting system and a bank account provided by the federal government in which all contributions received must be deposited along with funds provided for the public financing of that campaign. All expenses will be paid by a credit card attached to this account. The use of untraceable cash is illegal in all instances.[?] This account will be available for review online by the public 24-7 real time. Use of campaign funds is strictly limited to direct campaign expenses. Abuse of these funds carries the same punishment as bribery. Any funds left at the end of the election are turned over to the Federal Elections Commission and allocated to fund the election website.

We are currently working out these details.

We are continuing to consider other essential components which need to be added without making the law so complex and cumbersome that no one can understand it. Other issues being considered are the revolving door between Congress and private interests, breaking up the national media controlled by six corporations, regulations regarding debates, free and fair media coverage of campaign events and others necessary to insure a level playing field for all candidates,… There are more…many more. Some will be included in our current legislation, some left in the hands of administrative agencies like the FEC and FCC to prescribe the appropriate regulations taking into account this law and new and emerging technologies, and others that will take time to evolve as we move through the process.




With your help we are going to pass this one piece of legislation –The “Recovering Our Democracy Act” – before or as the result of this year’s elections and hopefully you will have me on my way to the White House to become your new President. We’re going to change the way our government performs its business forever in positive ways we can barely imagine right now. And with this legislation as the centerpiece, we will be able to respond to the urgent needs of all our people as never in recent history, not just those at the top.   That’s the promise that – with your help – we will fulfill together.

Please understand that passing our legislation and electing me does not automatically usher in utopia. It doesn’t solve all the problems and challenges we face. Restoring our democracy is only the platform,…the foundation on which we will define and build programs and to meet the common good of We the People starting with those whose plights are the greatest -- as our scriptures instruct.

That work will still lie before us. I am confident we will find the strength and courage as we did in the boom time after WWII. When the American people realized we have a world to heal and rebuild, …that we are all in this together…that – unlike “trickle-down economics – when we all work together for the common good…we find the energy and the will to move mountains…and this my friends is what makes America great. May it be so.

Good night and God bless us all in this healing work.


End Part One
We are still finalizing the draft of part two which we will forward to you in a few days. In the mean time we welcome your suggestions and responses.

Thank you,
Richard S Galloway, wedonthavefreespeech@outlook.com

HAVE YOU SIGNEDTHE PETITION:    BIG $$$    out of politics    NOW
Completely breaking the link between free speech and money   is the only way we can eliminate the abusive power of BIG $$$ Interests. Whatever issues concern you, success is almost impossible until we first take Big $$$ out of politics.



PETITION TEXT
I will not to support any candidate who does not pledge to sponsor and vote for a single act of Congress stating: "There is no relationship between speech and money stated or implied in the US Constitution and therefore no such relationship exists" as the basis of further reforms to limit the abusive power of Big Money.

Thank you


p.s. If you want to read or share our complete introductory series and other blog posts about this and other issues,  follow this link to our
We Don’t Have Free Speech blogsite Or if you have questions or comments, email us:  wedonthavefreespeech@outlook.com       
Annotated Table of Contents

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/sign-the-pledge-big-out?source=c.em&r_by=14960502
Insist candidates vote for a single act of Congress stating: “There is no relationship between speech and money stated or implied in the US Constitution and therefore no such relationship exists” as the basis of further reforms to limit the abuses of Big Money interests.
Best summary of the proposed “Recover our Democracy Act;” its Constitutional basis; removing purported legal objections, public financing of elections, limits on campaign contributions, public funding of federal elections, preprogrammed campaign website, redefining a bribe and much more
Cut and paste text to share by electronic media to spread the word on our plan
Our appointment being ignored while lobbyists immediately enter our Congressman’s office
Being on the outside: Explaining the meaning of our logo…the corrupting influence of Big Money
Political contributions, Citizens United Supreme Court Decision,  “We don’t have free speech. We can’t afford it,” our solution is an act of Congress,
 “Backdoor money in politics, quid pro quo,  “anything of material value offered or given to, or received and accepted by any candidate, incumbent or governmental employee under any circumstance shall be defined as a bribe,” penalties defined for candidates and government employees.
Our early commentaries: Free speech is fundamental to democracy, different views, uses and limitations of free speech, public financing of elections, fair and balanced media coverage

Original free speech: freedom to speak our mind,  power to “buy” both the “content” and the “delivery” of “free” speech,  "personhood" of corporations, Supreme Court and  Citizens United, ownership of the media, points of view,  political advertising, educational content, bought speech,…

Trickle down economics, tax reductions, income disparity, deregulation, power by changing belief systems, abuses, distortions and lies, is it regulation or just bad regulation?, affording governmental programs and high taxes, millennia of struggle by the rich to retain control vs. democracy,

 85% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 76% of Republicans opposed Citizens United

Humans speaking their mind without fear, means of extending the reach of speech [meida], bought speech, literally “free” speech decoupled from money, power of the media, corporate personhood, limitations of free speech, campaigns and political speech, alternative communications for elections: public financing, freedom of the Internet….
Figures on campaign contributions given by largest lobbying corporations [6+ years old = pre Supepr PACs]
One of our earliest posts:We don't have free speech that has meaningful access to our own representatives. Our logo, our slogan, our chants, young adults, spreading the word on the Internet, Obama’s election, making videos,
Largely unedited, free associated ideas on framing the legislation
Free public website designed and formatted to conduct campaigns for office and public issues , FEC provided bank account, and credit cards , campaign accounting system and regulations, partial design specifications, real time public review access…
the most logical public space to allow the free flow of information on issues of public interest

understanding the power of corporations as a means of amassing power and money, the founding fathers originally rejected the existence of corporations,” corporations are not mentioned in the Constitution and have no protected rights; therefore, Congress may limit or abolish corporations as deemed necessary for the public good. Growth of corporate power, personhood of corporations and personal rights attributed to corporations , theory of 14th amendment [due process] applies to corporations,




[1] The pronoun “I” in all its forms  in the context here is assumed to be Bernie Sanders with the understanding that at this point they are in fact not his words, nor represented as such.
[2] This would include such circumstances as giving a speech. There are so many possible exceptions that it was decided it is better to eliminate them all so that it does not become a new Gordian knot of complex regulations which water down the “giving and receiving itself” rule. Which follows.