In many cases clearly they did not. They chose instead to legislate from the bench “for the public good”.
There will never be another Amendment of substance.
Not with the current crop of dinosaurs around.
Ever.
Pac funds are 100 percent optional. But why would they support democrats if the gop was the voice of the working class?
I mean that local politics should not be nationalized. Therefore, an example would be that only funds in California could be used to unseat Schiff, and only funds in Texas could be used to unseat Cruz.
Well, i am not a republican nor a democrat. but i do find it odd that both sides point the finger at the other side like children.
question though, how much money did the Russians give Trump. I thought that Trump, Steyer and Bloomberg were all self financed.
And i thought Clinton spent more money than any candidate in history. Please give me some data to prove your point
it is rude to call him stupid he is obviously factually distressed.
Thank you for the clarification.
Election of FEDERAL Representatives and Senators are not “local politics”. They vote on national issues which means their election have federal impact.
Now if you wanted a law that said Senators and Representatives who accept funds from only local sources are then limited to voting on local political issues (i.e. in the state or district) and their votes on national issues are not counted… OK, wouldn’t work but it would be a logical position.
Since Senators and Representatives have national impact not, not realistic.
If I like Cruz’s position on federal immigration or gun control I as a citizen ought to be able to drop a check in the mail and support his campaign.
.
.
.
.WW, PHS
While what you say is logical and correct it leaves out original intent. Originally senators were appointed by states and not popularly elected. Members of the house were only there to represent their locality. These operating parameters have been shoved aside to the point that local issues are now all national issues which is at best a bastardization of limited government and states rights.
I didn’t call him anything.
you characterized his post which implies an attribute to him.
Interesting. Maybe we could get rid of the whole concept of "from… " Just elect 535 and be done with it.
To take money out of the Senate. Repeal the 17th and voila!
I don’t imply. Quit starting ■■■■■
So just the governor has to be corrupt? It’s going in georgia right now. The party is trying to bully him into putting in who they want
Do your research.
Doesn’t change what I said as both Senators and Representatives having an impact and voting on national issues.
Repealing the 17th and making Senators appointed by the State Legislature wouldn’t change that for Representatives. As a matter of fact it would bring more attempts at influence to the State legislatures since they would be appointing Senators.
.
.
.
.WW, PHS
In the state.
No, Representatives would have to be handled differently.
Does my representative represent me or you? Senators?
Do Representatives and Senators vote on Federal legislation that has impact outside of their state?
(Personally I don’t have a problem with the proposed law for local finance. Just a realist that it will never happen since Senators and Representatives don’t vote on local issues - they vote on Federal legislation.
.
.
.
.WW, PHS
I agree with @bootz on this one.
There shouldn’t be any outside money. And for reps not even from outside the district.
1 Like
