Jump to content
Accelerated Evolution

Congress Attempts to Kill the "Third-Party Threat"


Recommended Posts

On February 1, congressional Democrats, led by Rep. Obey of Wisconsin, introduced a bill, H.R. 4694, that would end viable, third-party competition in races for the U.S. House of Representatives.

The bill, ironically named the "Let the People Decide Clean Campaign Act," would mandate public funds (taken from the U.S. Treasury) to candidates for the House of Representatives and forbid candidates from taking private funds such as contributions from individual donors.

The ambiguously-written bill provides funds for candidates of the "two major parties" but essentially scuttles any campaign efforts of third-party or independent candidates.

For third-party candidates to be eligible for the same funds that Republicans and Democrats would receive, they would have to obtain enough signatures to exceed 20% of votes cast in the last election within their district.

The catch under the proposed legislation is that third-party or independent candidates cannot pay petitioners to collect any signatures, making it impossible to fund their campaigns.

H.R. 4694 is yet another attempt by our politicians in office to shut down Libertarian Party candidates and other competitive third-party and independent campaigns.

"The Republican and Democratic parties exist to maintain power for their own benefit. The Libertarian Party exists to grasp power for the benefit of the nation," stated Shane Cory, chief of staff for the Libertarian Party. "American voters are waking up to this reality, and as they do, the two parties are trying everything within their power to shut us down."

http://www.lp.org/media/article_284.shtml

Link to comment

A. I don't give a shit about your party.

B. The entire party system is beyond immoral.

C. Democrats are stupid.

D. All of the above.

(If you chose D, you're correct!)

Nicely put.

Yeah, my history teacher ran for congress a few years back with the Green Party... There's more than three political parties, after all. There's two that hold all the power, and then there's the libertarians and the Green Party, which seem to get the most attention, and then there's people like the Freedom Socialist party that will never get a single vote, ever.

This house bill needs to get fucked, though. A two party system sucks. I'm in favor of many, many more parties.

Link to comment

A. I don't give a shit about your party.

B. The entire party system is beyond immoral.

C. Democrats are stupid.

D. All of the above.

(If you chose D, you're correct!)

b is right, C is right, but you don't mention republicans, who are as bad as the Dems

I have to say that our founders were correct, and politiccal parties are a bad idea

Link to comment

b is right, C is right, but you don't mention republicans, who are as bad as the Dems

I have to say that our founders were correct, and politiccal parties are a bad idea

George Washington was right. You have to keep in mind as soon as he died Madison, Jefferson, Adams, and Hamilton rushed to get political parties established.

Link to comment

So many things are wrong with this…

1) This would mean that the taxpayers would pay for some 900 political campaigns every 2 years. And since politicians are making up the amounts, it wouldn’t surprise me if they all receive a “significant amount”

2) This won’t actually stop any thing, think about it. Lets say I wont to help a guy get elected to office, but I can not directly give him money, so instead I set up a separate organization, the friends of ______(guy you wont to get elected). So now this organization runs television adds that encourage people to vote for the guy you wont.

3) This would favor people with certain types of belief over others, which is wrong.

4) The idea that an independent candidate could not receive campaign funds unless he got the signatures from 20% of number of people that voted is ridicules!

I think that this is intended to be some form of campaign reform legislature to try and make it look like they are stopping corruption, but all this does is show just how corrupt and backward the government is.

Link to comment

Indeed. But it's not a huge difference.

Republicans: "Grr! We are evil!"

Democrat: "Grr! We're not going to do anything about it!"

No, its more like...

Republicans: "We'll sell out anything for a buck."

Democrats: "We'll sell out anything for a buck."

With the exception of a few minor details the two parties are the same. No politician cares enough about any of the issues to risk being unpopular.

Link to comment

This is fucking bull! I agree that we do have campaign money problems. But this is not trying to fix the problem at all! I see it at nothing less than an attempt to further subvert the election process.

Two parties, no choices! Anyone?

I'm not a fan of the party system, but if we have to use it then there needs to be more then two fucking parties!

And do you think the republicans are going to try and stop this? Maybe, but only to try and keep getting their campaign money through the system as it is now.

---

With this, goes any chance of getting a party that I agree with and would join.. Any time soon at least.

Fixed

Fixed...again. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

No, its more like...

Republicans: "We'll sell out anything for a buck."

Democrats: "We'll sell out anything for a buck."

With the exception of a few minor details the two parties are the same. No politician cares enough about any of the issues to risk being unpopular.

QFT ^

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...