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.
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 Maine, Arizona, North
Carolina, New 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.
Please click
to sign the petition. http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/sign-the-pledge-big-out?source=c.em&r_by=14960502
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment