AltBib.Com Bibliography for #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections:
Showing All 36 Matching Links Found
+ Show/Hide Search Tools and Options


Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:02:38
1/1/2011 Military-industrial complex
(MIC), or Military–industrial-congressional complex[1] (MICC) is a concept commonly used to refer to policy and monetary relationships between legislators, national armed forces, and the industrial sector that supports them. These relationships include political contributions, political approval for defense spending, lobbying to support bureaucracies, and beneficial legislation and oversight of the industry. It is a type of iron triangle. The term is most often played in reference to the military of the United States, where it gained popularity after its use in the farewell address of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, though the term is applicable to any country with a similarly developed infrastructure. The term is sometimes used more broadly to include the entire network of contracts and flows of money and resources among individuals as well as institutions of the defense contractors, The Pentagon, and the Congress and executive branch. This sector is intrinsically prone to principal-agent problem, moral hazard, and rent seeking. Cases of political corruption have also surfaced with regularity. A similar thesis was originally expressed by Daniel Guérin, in his 1936 book Fascism and Big Business, about the fascist government support to heavy industry. It can be defined as, "an informal and changing coalition of groups with vested psychological, moral, and material interests in the continuous development and maintenance of high levels of weaponry, in preservation of colonial markets and in military-strategic conceptions of internal affairs." (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#1 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:02:41
1/1/2011 Iron triangle (US politics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about a political term. For other meanings, see Iron Triangle. Iron Triangle diagram. In United States politics, the iron triangle is a term used by political scientists to describe the policy-making relationship among the congressional committees, the bureaucracy (executive) (sometimes called "government agencies"), and interest groups. For example, within the federal government the three sides often consist of: various congressional committees, which are responsible for funding government programs and operations and then providing oversight of them; the federal agencies (often Independent agencies), which are responsible for the regulation of those affected industries; and last, the industries themselves, as well as their trade associations and lobbying groups, which benefit, or seek benefit, from these operations and programs. Probably the earliest concept of the "iron triangle" was on January 17, 1919 by Ralph Pulitzer. It was the post World War I era when Pulitzer wrote about the Paris Peace Conference and the new relationships between the allied Governments.[1] He stated, “Three forces are laboring for such a sinister peace: (1) the bourbonism of politicians…; (2) the materialism of industrial…; (3) the militarism of professional soldiers…” and “If the Peace Conference is allowed to remain between governments instead of between peoples it is apt to degenerate…” An often-used example of the term is with reference to the military-industrial complex, with Congress (and the House and Senate Committees on Armed Services), defense contractors, and the U.S. Department of Defense forming the iron triangle. The term iron triangle has been widely used by political scientists outside the United States and is today an accepted term in the field. (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#2 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:03:41
3/21/2008 Democrats are darlings of Wall St: Some fear donations will soften attitudes on financial regulation
Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, who are running for president as economic populists, are benefiting handsomely from Wall Street donations, easily surpassing Republican John McCain in campaign contributions from the troubled financial services sector. It is part of a broader fundraising shift toward Democrats, compared to past campaigns when Republicans were the favorites of Wall Street. Some Democrats worry that the influx of money will make their candidates less willing to call for increased regulation of financial markets, which have been in turmoil after a wave of foreclosures on sub-prime mortgages. These concerned Democrats argue that their candidates, and presumptive Republican nominee McCain, should be willing to push for financial institutions to accept more government regulation -- in exchange for likely future bailouts, such as the recent deal the Federal Reserve orchestrated for JPMorgan Chase & Co. to take over Bear Stearns Cos. (Los Angeles Times)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#3 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:04:54
1/1/2011 Lobbying Database
In addition to campaign contributions to elected officials and candidates, companies, labor unions, and other organizations spend billions of dollars each year to lobby Congress and federal agencies. Some special interests retain lobbying firms, many of them located along Washington's legendary K Street; others have lobbyists working in-house. We've got totals spent on lobbying, beginning in 1998, for everyone from AAI Corp. to Zurich Financial. You can use the options below to search through our database in several ways: search by name for a company, lobbying firm or individual lobbyist; search for the total spending by a particular industry; view the interests that lobbied a particular government agency; or search for lobbying on a general issue or specific piece of legislation.

$3.51 Billion spent lobbying in 2010 (Center for Responsive Politics)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#4 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:05:18
12/28/2009 Financial Industry Invests Heavily in Key Lawmakers
(Originally published Nov. 16, 2009; Updated with third quarter Senate data Dec. 28, 2009) As Congress considers legislation to reregulate the financial services industry in response to the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression, the industry is focusing campaign contributions on the congressional leadership and members of the committees crafting reform legislation. Between November 2008 (when the current election cycle began) and Sept. 30, 2009, the financial industry – including banks, investment firms, insurance companies and real estate companies – has given $48.3 million in campaign contributions to members of Congress and their leadership political action committees, according to data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics (www.opensecrets.org).

Between November 2008...and Sept. 30, 2009, the financial industry...has given $48.3 million in campaign contributions to members of Congress and their leadership political action committees... ...The 94 members of the two finance committees have received $16.9 million overall. The top 10 committee recipients include the Democratic chairmen: Sen. Chris Dodd (Conn.) and Rep. Barney Frank (Mass.); and the ranking Republicans on the committees: Sen. Richard Shelby (Ala.) and Rep. Spencer Bachus (Ala.). (Public Citizen)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#5 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:05:58
1/1/2011 OpenSecrets.org
is your nonpartisan guide to money’s influence on U.S. elections and public policy. Whether you’re a voter, journalist, activist, student or interested citizen, use our free site to shine light on your government. Count cash and make change. (Center for Responsive Politics)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       0
#6 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:05:58
1/1/2011 Barack Obama (D) Top Contributors 2008
This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2008 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates. Because of contribution limits, organizations that bundle together many individual contributions are often among the top donors to presidential candidates. These contributions can come from the organization's members or employees (and their families). The organization may support one candidate, or hedge its bets by supporting multiple candidates. Groups with national networks of donors

like EMILY's List and Club for Growth

make for particularly big bundlers. University of California $1,642,735 Goldman Sachs $1,012,841 Harvard University $862,604 Microsoft Corp $852,167 Google Inc $814,540 JPMorgan Chase & Co $807,799 Citigroup Inc $736,771 Time Warner $623,118 Sidley Austin LLP $600,298 Stanford University $595,716 National Amusements Inc $563,548 WilmerHale Llp $549,918 Skadden, Arps et al $543,539 Columbia University $536,202 UBS AG $532,674 IBM Corp $532,372 General Electric $528,180 US Government $517,908 Morgan Stanley $512,232 Latham & Watkins $502,045 (Center for Responsive Politics)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#7 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:06:03
7/21/2010 Background on the President's Bill Signing Ceremony Today
RONALD REAGAN BUILDING Today, the President will deliver remarks and sign the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act at the Ronald Reagan Building. The President will be joined by a wide array of nearly 400 individuals who were instrumental in passing this historic legislation, including consumer advocates, business leaders, state and local officials, members of Congress, and Americans who will be impacted by reform. ... (White House)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       0
#8 
keywords: Aarp, Alan Blinder, Americans For Financial Reform, Andrew Giordano, Ann Yerger, Archibald Cox, Bailouts, Bank Of New York Mellon, Barack Obama, Barclays, Barney Frank, Bill Brodsky, Blanche Lincoln, Bob Diamond, Calpers, Camden Fine, Center For Responsible Lending, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Chris Dodd, Collin Peterson, Consumer Federation Of America, Consumers Union, Council Of Institutional Investors, Demos, Dennis Moore, Ed Mierzwinski, Elizabeth Warren, Financial Crisis, Gary Locke, Gerald Hassell, Gregory Meeks, Harry Reid, Harvard University, Heather Booth, Heather Mcghee, Icba, Illinois, Iowa, Jack Reed, Janet Murguia, Joe Dear, Joseph Biden, Lauren Saunders, Lisa Madigan, Luis Gutierrez, Martha Coakley, Massachusetts, Maxine Waters, Mel Watt, Michael Calhoun, Nancy Leamond, Nancy Pelosi, Nancy Zirkin, National Consumer Law Center, National Council Of LA Raza, New Jersey, Pam Banks, Paul Kanjorski, Paul Volcker, Princeton University, Robert Bowser, Robin Fox, Ronald Reagan, Steny Hoyer, Tim Johnson, Timothy Geithner, Tom Miller, Travis Plunkett, US Congress, US Pirg, United States, Vikram Pandit, Wall Street Add New Keyword To Link



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:06:04
7/21/2010 Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
"An Act to promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end "too big to fail", to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes." (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#9 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:06:28
3/1/2011 It's the Inequality, Stupid: Eleven charts that explain everything that's wrong with America.
How Rich Are the Superrich? A huge share of the nation's economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top one-hundredth of one percent, who now make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the bottom 90 percent of us? $31,244. (Mother Jones)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 2/28/11                   0       10
#10 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:06:38
Just one prominent example of how the crisis should not have blind-sided any economist in a position of responsibility.
11/2/2008 Peter Schiff Was Right 2006
2007 (2nd Edition) This is a set of clips of Peter Schiff from 2006 and 2007. With labels and 2008 predictions to the first video. CNBC, FOX,
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11      
            		 0       1
#11 
keywords: Arthur Laffer, Ben Stein, Charles Payne, Financial Crisis, Fox, NBC, Peter Schiff, United States, Wall Street Add New Keyword To Link



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:06:42
1/1/2011 Late-2000s financial crisis
The Great Recession (often called the Credit Crunch or the Global Financial Crisis) is considered by many economists to be the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s.[1] It resulted in the collapse of large financial institutions, the bailout of banks by national governments, and downturns in stock markets around the world. In many areas, the housing market has also suffered, resulting in numerous evictions, foreclosures and prolonged vacancies. It contributed to the failure of key businesses, declines in consumer wealth estimated in the trillions of U.S. dollars, and a significant decline in economic activity, leading to a severe global economic recession in 2008.[2] The financial crisis was triggered by a liquidity shortfall in the United States banking system in 2008.[3] The collapse of the U.S. housing bubble, which peaked in 2007, caused the values of securities tied to U.S. real estate pricing to plummet, damaging financial institutions globally.[4] Questions regarding bank solvency, declines in credit availability and damaged investor confidence had an impact on global stock markets, where securities suffered large losses during 2008 and early 2009. Economies worldwide slowed during this period, as credit tightened and international trade declined.[5] Governments and central banks responded with unprecedented fiscal stimulus, monetary policy expansion and institutional bailouts. Although there have been aftershocks, the financial crisis itself ended sometime between late-2008 and mid-2009.[6][7][8] While many causes for the financial crisis have been suggested, with varying weight assigned by experts,[9] the United States Senate issuing the Levin–Coburn Report found “that the crisis was not a natural disaster, but the result of high risk, complex financial products; undisclosed conflicts of interest; and the failure of regulators, the credit rating agencies, and the market itself to rein in the excesses of Wall Street.”[10][11] Critics argued that credit rating agencies and investors failed to accurately price the risk involved with mortgage-related financial products, and that governments did not adjust their regulatory practices to address 21st-century financial markets.[12] The repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 effectively removed the separation that previously existed between Wall Street investment banks and depository banks. There is some debate as to what role the repeal of Glass–Steagall had on the late 2000s financial crisis.[13] In response to the financial crisis, both market-based and regulatory solutions have been implemented or are under consideration.[14] (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#12 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:06:47
2/2/2011 All-Time Record: Wall Street Compensation Hits $135 Billion
Wall Street was on the ropes just 25 months ago. Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Bros., Bank of America, Wachovia, maybe Morgan Stanley; Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase were wounded. GE could not role over its commercial paper. European banks required cash infusions from our central bank. Just in the wake of a report highlighting Wall Street’s narrow, selfish imbecilities, we are treated to the stunning realization that the captains of the sinking liner are today enjoying the all-time record payoff for surviving with massive transfusions. The payout of $135 billion to employees of Wall Street firms in 2010 is equivalent to the total market value of both Bank of America and Citigroup. Imagine– in two years. (Forbes)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#13 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:07:00
9/23/2009 Even the Part-Time Jobs are Disappearing -- The Economy is a Lie, Too
Americans cannot get any truth out of their government about anything, the economy included. Americans are being driven into the ground economically, with one million school children now homeless, while Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke announces that the recession is over. The spin that masquerades as news is becoming more delusional. Consumer spending is 70% of the US economy. It is the driving force, and it has been shut down. Except for the super rich, there has been no growth in consumer incomes in the 21st century. Statistician John Williams of shadowstats.com reports that real household income has never recovered its pre-2001 peak.

The unemployment rate, as reported, is a fiction and has been since the Clinton administration. The unemployment rate does not include jobless Americans who have been unemployed for more than a year and have given up on finding work. The reported 10% unemployment rate is understated by the millions of Americans who are suffering long-term unemployment and are no longer counted as unemployed. As each month passes, unemployed Americans drop off the unemployment role due to nothing except the passing of time. The inflation rate, especially “core inflation,” is another fiction. “Core inflation” does not include food and energy, two of Americans’ biggest budget items. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) assumes, ever since the Boskin Commission during the Clinton administration, that if prices of items go up consumers substitute cheaper items. This is certainly the case, but this way of measuring inflation means that the CPI is no longer comparable to past years, because the basket of goods in the index is variable. The Boskin Commission’s CPI, by lowering the measured rate of inflation, raises the real GDP growth rate. The result of the statistical manipulation is an understated inflation rate, thus eroding the real value of Social Security income, and an overstated growth rate. Statistical manipulation cloaks a declining standard of living. (Counter Punch)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#14 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:07:04
1/21/2011 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 08-205 (2010), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited—because of the First Amendment. The 5–4 decision, in favor of Citizens United, resulted from a dispute over whether the non-profit corporation Citizens United could air a film critical of Hillary Clinton, and whether the group could advertise the film in broadcast ads featuring Clinton's image, in apparent violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, commonly known as the McCain–Feingold Act.[2] The decision reached the Supreme Court on appeal from a January 2008 decision by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The lower court decision upheld provisions of the McCain–Feingold Act which prevented the film Hillary: The Movie from being shown on television within 30 days of 2008 Democratic primaries.[1][3] The Court struck down a provision of the McCain–Feingold Act that prohibited all corporations, both for-profit and not-for-profit, and unions from broadcasting “electioneering communications.”[2] An "electioneering communication" was defined in McCain–Feingold as a broadcast, cable, or satellite communication that mentioned a candidate within 60 days of a general election or thirty days of a primary. The decision overruled Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) and partially overruled McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (2003).[4] McCain–Feingold had previously been weakened, without overruling McConnell, in Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. (2007). The Court did uphold requirements for disclaimer and disclosure by sponsors of advertisements. The case did not involve the federal ban on direct contributions from corporations or unions to candidate campaigns or political parties. (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       2
#15 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:07:28
11/4/2010 The Citizens United Effect: 40 percent of outside money made possible by Supreme Court ruling
In 2002 former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld once flippantly described connections between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda terrorists by saying, "There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we now know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns; there are things we do not know we don’t know." Little did Rumsfeld know that his remark would be the most accurate description for a murky midterm election eight years down the road. The 2010 midterm election is filled with both "known unknowns," outside groups raised and spent $126 million on elections without disclosing the source, and "unknown unknowns," we don't know what those undisclosed donors want. We do know one thing: the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling allowed this election to be the costliest and least transparent midterm in recent history. The impact of Citizens United can be judged by simply following the money. The $126 million in undisclosed money represents more than a quarter of the total $450 million spent by outside groups. Add the $60 million spent by groups that were allowed to raise unlimited money, but still had to disclose, to the undisclosed money and the total amount of outside money made possible by the Citizens United ruling reaches $186 million or 40 percent of the total spent by outside groups. (Sunlight Foundation)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#16 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:07:42
1/21/2011 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus CITIZENS UNITED v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA No. 08–205. Argued March 24, 2009—Reargued September 9, 2009–– Decided January 21, 2010
Justice Stevens' dissent: "...The Court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation. The path it has taken to reach its outcome will, I fear, do damage to this institution...." (US Supreme Court)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#17 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:07:57
1/18/2011 Reversing 'Citizens United'
It will be a year this week since Chief Justice John Roberts and his conservative activist colleagues on the Supreme Court joined together in a dramatic assault on American democracy. Their decision in the Citizens United case overturned more than a century's worth of precedent by awarding corporations the rights of citizens with regard to electioneering. The court did away with limits on when corporations can spend on elections, how much they can spend and how they can spend their money, allowing unlimited contributions from corporate treasuries to flood the electoral landscape. As The Nation noted in the days after the case was decided, "This decision tips the balance against active citizenship and the rule of law by making it possible for the nation's most powerful economic interests to manipulate not just individual politicians and electoral contests but political discourse itself." According to Bill de Blasio, New York City's public advocate, Citizens United spending

that is, spending that was only made possible by the court's ruling

accounted for 15 percent of the roughly $4 billion spent on the 2010 midterm elections. Eighty-five million dollars of Citizens United money was spent on U.S. Senate races alone. Worse, 30 percent of all spending by outside groups was funded by anonymous donations, an illegal action prior to the ruling. Forty million of the dollars spent on Senate races came from sources that might never be revealed. (Washington Post)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#18 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:08:12
2/17/2010 In Supreme Court Ruling on Campaign Finance, the Public Dissents
Memo to the Supreme Court: President Obama isn’t the only one who’s annoyed. Obama raised eyebrows at his State of the Union address last month by criticizing the high court’s ruling throwing out limits on corporate spending in political campaigns. Turns out he’s got company: Our latest ABC News/Washington Post poll finds that 80 percent of Americans likewise oppose the ruling, including 65 percent who “strongly” oppose it, an unusually high intensity of sentiment. Seventy-two percent, moreover, support the idea of a legislative workaround to try to reinstate the limits the court lifted. The bipartisan nature of these views is striking in these largely partisan times. The court’s ruling is opposed, respectively, by 76, 81 and 85 percent of Republicans, independents and Democrats; and by 73, 85 and 86 percent of conservatives, moderates and liberals. Majorities in all these groups, ranging from 58 to 73 percent, not only oppose the ruling but feel strongly about it. (ABC)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#19 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:09:28
Somewhat interesting --- the law of attraction, ask and you shall receive, you can do anything!
1/1/2007 The Secret
This film presents amazing real life stories and testimonials of regular people who have changed their lives in profound ways. By applying The Secret they present instances of eradicating disease, acquiring massive wealth, overcoming obstacles and achieving what many would regard as impossible. The Secret shows how to apply this powerful knowledge to your life in every area from health to wealth, to success and relationships. The Secret is everything you have dreamed of... and now it's in your hands. (Secret LLC)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11      
            		 0       0
#20 
keywords: Add New Keyword To Link



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:10:10
1/24/2011 Left, right gear up for campaign-finance clash before 2012 elections
Liberals and conservatives alike are gearing up for battles over campaign financing rules in anticipation of the 2012 election, which will decide control of the White House and Congress. Liberal groups want to impose disclosure rules on shadowy political advocacy groups that raised and spent tens of millions of dollars in corporate contributions on the 2010 midterm elections. (The Hill)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#21 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:10:12
6/24/2010 DISCLOSE Act: House Passes Major Campaign Finance Legislation
The final vote was 219 to 206 in favor of the DISCLOSE Act, with only two Republicans -- Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) and Joseph Cao (R-La.) -- crossing party lines. The bill would provide tough new disclosure rules for groups that invest in the election process. In addition to forcing all 501c4 groups to stand by the ads they sponsor during elections (with the CEO of the organization literally forced to appear in the spot), the law would also require groups that met certain criteria to reveal who was funding their election activity. The latter provision sparked intense pushback from a host of business groups, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. House Democratic leadership had granted an exemption from that particular element of disclosure for the NRA. But after fierce objection to the carve out, the bill's author, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), expanded the loophole to include other organizations as well. The legislation was pulled from consideration late last week when passage became uncertain. House leadership made impassioned pleas to their colleagues on Thursday morning (see below) before heading to the floor this afternoon to finally vote. (Huffington Post)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#22 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:10:29
1/1/2011 Campaign finance reform in the United States
is the common term for the political effort in the United States to change the involvement of money in politics, primarily in political campaigns. Although attempts to regulate campaign finance by legislation date back to 1867, the first successful attempts nationally to regulate and enforce campaign finance originated in the 1970s. The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1972 required candidates to disclose sources of campaign contributions and campaign expenditures. It was amended in 1974 with the introduction of statutory limits on contributions, and creation of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). It attempted to restrict the influence of wealthy individuals by limiting individual donations to $1,000 and donations by political action committees (PACs) to $5,000. These specific election donations are known as ‘hard money.’ The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, also known as "McCain-Feingold", after its sponsors, is the most recent major federal law on campaign finance, which revised some of the legal limits on expenditures set in 1974, and prohibited unregulated contributions (commonly referred to as "soft money") to national political parties. ‘Soft money’ also refers to funds spent by independent organizations that do not specifically advocate the election or defeat of candidates, and funds which are not contributed directly to candidate campaigns. In early 2010, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited pursuant to the right of these entities to free speech. (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#23 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:11:07
Fun idea my mother got printed a decade ago.
8/6/2000 Partying Politics (op ed)
The July 27 front-page story "Lobbyists Fete Lawmakers" helps explain why ordinary citizens don't bother weighing in on public- policy debates. Hired guns entertain our representatives with steak dinners that one Maryland lobbyist describes as valuable "schmooze time." (Washington Post)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#24 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:11:27
1/1/2011 Campaign finance reform in the United States
is the common term for the political effort in the United States to change the involvement of money in politics, primarily in political campaigns. Although attempts to regulate campaign finance by legislation date back to 1867, the first successful attempts nationally to regulate and enforce campaign finance originated in the 1970s. The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1972 required candidates to disclose sources of campaign contributions and campaign expenditures. It was amended in 1974 with the introduction of statutory limits on contributions, and creation of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). It attempted to restrict the influence of wealthy individuals by limiting individual donations to $1,000 and donations by political action committees (PACs) to $5,000. These specific election donations are known as ‘hard money.’ The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, also known as "McCain-Feingold", after its sponsors, is the most recent major federal law on campaign finance, which revised some of the legal limits on expenditures set in 1974, and prohibited unregulated contributions (commonly referred to as "soft money") to national political parties. ‘Soft money’ also refers to funds spent by independent organizations that do not specifically advocate the election or defeat of candidates, and funds which are not contributed directly to candidate campaigns. In early 2010, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited pursuant to the right of these entities to free speech. (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#25 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:11:41
2/1/2011 Public Funding of Presidential Elections
Published in August 1996 (updated February 2011) Contents Introduction What is Public Funding? When and How Did it Begin? How Does Public Funding Work? Primary Matching Funds General Election Funding Expenditure Limits for Publicly Funded Candidates Convention Funding What is the FEC's Role? Eligibility for Public Funds Repayments of Public Funds How Can I Support My Candidate? How Can I Obtain Copies of Reports? How Can I Get More Information? (Federal Election Commission)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#26 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:11:52
1/26/2011 House votes for repeal of public-paid campaigns: Lawmakers say system is broken
Saying it has become an obsolete waste of money, the House on Wednesday voted to end the taxpayer-funded presidential campaign finance system that has fallen out of favor over the past decade as candidates have chosen to ignore it. The bill steps back from the 1970s-era dream of publicly financed campaigns. More than $600 million could be saved over the next decade by ending the system that channels taxpayer dollars to presidential candidates who agree to abide by fundraising and spending limits. Republicans said the 239-160 vote was just a recognition of how broken the system has become, particularly after Barack Obama reversed a campaign pledge and opted out of the primary and general election matching funds in 2008. “It was President Obama who killed it and made a mockery of public financing of campaigns,” said Rep. Aaron Schock, Illinois Republican. Despite his decision to opt out in 2008, Mr. Obama on Tuesday announced that he opposed the Republicans’ bill. He said the system should be fixed rather than ended, and predicted that corruption would grow with the end of publicly financed presidential campaigns. (Washington Times)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#27 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:12:00
1/1/2011 Campaign finance reform in the United States
is the common term for the political effort in the United States to change the involvement of money in politics, primarily in political campaigns. Although attempts to regulate campaign finance by legislation date back to 1867, the first successful attempts nationally to regulate and enforce campaign finance originated in the 1970s. The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1972 required candidates to disclose sources of campaign contributions and campaign expenditures. It was amended in 1974 with the introduction of statutory limits on contributions, and creation of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). It attempted to restrict the influence of wealthy individuals by limiting individual donations to $1,000 and donations by political action committees (PACs) to $5,000. These specific election donations are known as ‘hard money.’ The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, also known as "McCain-Feingold", after its sponsors, is the most recent major federal law on campaign finance, which revised some of the legal limits on expenditures set in 1974, and prohibited unregulated contributions (commonly referred to as "soft money") to national political parties. ‘Soft money’ also refers to funds spent by independent organizations that do not specifically advocate the election or defeat of candidates, and funds which are not contributed directly to candidate campaigns. In early 2010, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited pursuant to the right of these entities to free speech. (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#28 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:12:25
1/1/2011 Clean Elections
(variously called, "Clean Money," "Voter-Owned Elections," or "Fair Elections") is a term used to describe a particular system of government financing of political campaigns, where the government provides a grant to prospective candidates who agree to limit their and private fundraising efforts and limit their campaign-spending. (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/1/11                   0       1
#29 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:13:27
1/1/2011 The Sunlight Foundation
uses cutting-edge technology and ideas to make government transparent and accountable. The Sunlight Foundation is a non-profit, nonpartisan organization that uses the power of the Internet to catalyze greater government openness and transparency, and provides new tools and resources for media and citizens, alike. We are committed to improving access to government information by making it available online, indeed redefining “public” information as meaning “online,” and by creating new tools and websites to enable individuals and communities to better access that information and put it to use. We want to catalyze greater government transparency by engaging individual citizens and communities -- technologists, policy wonks, open government advocates and ordinary citizens –- demanding policies that will enable all of us to hold government accountable. Sunlight develops and encourages new government policies to make it more open and transparent, facilitates searchable, sortable and machine readable databases, builds tools and websites to enable easy access to information, fosters distributed research projects as an community building tool, engages in advocacy for 21st century laws to require that government make data available in real time and trains thousands of journalists and citizens in using data and the web to watchdog Washington. Major elements of our work include the Sunlight Labs, Sunlight Reporting Group, Sunlight Live and the Open House Project. (Sunlight Foundation)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/3/11                   0       0
#30 
keywords: Add New Keyword To Link



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:13:29
1/1/2011 Common Cause
is a nonpartisan, nonprofit advocacy organization founded in 1970 by John Gardner as a vehicle for citizens to make their voices heard in the political process and to hold their elected leaders accountable to the public interest. Today, Common Cause is one of the most active, effective, and respected nonprofit organizations working for political change in America. Common Cause strives to strengthen our democracy by empowering our members, supporters and the general public to take action on critical policy issues. Now with nearly 400,000 members and supporters and 35 state organizations, Common Cause remains committed to honest, open and accountable government, as well as encouraging citizen participation in democracy. In 2000, the organization created the Common Cause Education Fund, a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity, as its public education and research affiliate. (Common Cause)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/3/11                   0       0
#31 
keywords: Add New Keyword To Link



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:13:30
1/1/2011 Public Campaign
is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to sweeping campaign reform that aims to dramatically reduce the role of big special interest money in American politics. Public Campaign is laying the foundation for reform by working with a broad range of organizations, including local community groups, around the country that are fighting for change and national organizations whose members are not fairly represented under the current campaign finance system. Together we are building a network of national and state-based efforts to create a powerful national force for federal and state campaign reform. (Public Campaign)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/3/11                   0       1
#32 
keywords: Add New Keyword To Link



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:13:32
1/1/2011 Public Citizen with their Clean Up Washington campaign
The "Clean Up Washington" website is the on-line face of a grassroots campaign undertaken by Public Citizen, a national public interest organization, that seeks to rid our nation's capital of entrenched special interest influence-peddling. CleanUpWashington.org is designed to be your one-stop-shopping location for all the latest updates on corruption in the nation's capital, to get thoughtful educational materials, and to learn about smart, coordinated grassroots campaigns to force our elected leaders to take action. The site provides you with comprehensive reports on how special interests harm you in everyday life, outlines a powerful reform agenda that will restore a betrayed public trust, and gives you a chance – through the Watchdog Blog – to tell us what you really think about the politicians who do the bidding of powerful special interests. Thanks for joining us! (Public Citizen)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/3/11                   0       0
#33 
keywords: Add New Keyword To Link



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:13:35
1/1/2011 Democracy 21
is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to making democracy work for all Americans. Democracy 21, and its education arm, Democracy 21 Education Fund, work to eliminate the undue influence of big money in American politics and to ensure the integrity and fairness of government decisions and elections. The organization promotes campaign finance reform and other political reforms to accomplish these goals. Founded by Fred Wertheimer in 1997, Democracy 21's efforts have been recognized by The Wall Street Journal which observed that Wertheimer is "perhaps the capital's longest-toiling advocate of reducing the role of money in politics" and by Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne, who has described Wertheimer as "the eminence grise of the campaign reform movement." Democracy 21 provides the public and media with the latest information and analysis on money and politics, and focuses its activities on: Promoting campaign finance reforms, including closing loopholes in the campaign finance laws, reforming the Federal Election Commission, and fixing the presidential public financing system; Ensuring that the campaign finance laws are effectively implemented and enforced; Defending campaign finance laws in the courts; and Promoting effective congressional ethics rules and enforcement. (Democracy 21)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/3/11                   0       0
#34 
keywords: Add New Keyword To Link



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:14:36
Just one interpretation of this complex competition of ideas
1/1/2011 An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic
It is important to keep in mind the difference between a Democracy and a Republic, as dissimilar forms of government. Understanding the difference is essential to comprehension of the fundamentals involved. It should be noted, in passing, that use of the word Democracy as meaning merely the popular type of government--that is, featuring genuinely free elections by the people periodically--is not helpful in discussing, as here, the difference between alternative and dissimilar forms of a popular government: a Democracy versus a Republic. This double meaning of Democracy--a popular-type government in general, as well as a specific form of popular government--needs to be made clear in any discussion, or writing, regarding this subject, for the sake of sound understanding. These two forms of government: Democracy and Republic, are not only dissimilar but antithetical, reflecting the sharp contrast between (a) The Majority Unlimited, in a Democracy, lacking any legal safeguard of the rights of The Individual and The Minority, and (b) The Majority Limited, in a Republic under a written Constitution safeguarding the rights of The Individual and The Minority; as we shall now see.
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 8/3/11                   0       1
#35 



Wiki World Order: #7. Clean Elections Fight Corporate Erections time reference: 00:14:39
1/1/2010 Plutocracy
is rule by the wealthy, or power provided by wealth. The combination of both plutocracy and oligarchy is called plutarchy. (Wikipedia)
+ Show URL
 & ALL Tags
posted: 10/2/10                   0       1
#36 
keywords: Plutocracy Add New Keyword To Link




Showing All 36 Matching Links Found