"Exactly. Bush never said that he would veto CFR"
21 posted on 3/21/02 7:31 AM Pacific by Dane
Source
Posted on 03/22/2002 1:12:55 PM PST by Jim Robinson
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 15, 2001
President Bush Outlines Campaign Reform Principles
March 15, 2001
The Honorable Trent Lott
Senate Majority Leader
S-230, The Capitol
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Lott:
As the Senate prepares to consider campaign finance reform legislation, I wanted to highlight my principles for reform. I am committed to working with the Congress to ensure that fair and balanced campaign reform legislation is enacted.
These principles represent my framework for assessing campaign finance reform legislation. I remain open to other ideas to meet shared goals.
I am hopeful that, working together, we can achieve responsible campaign finance reforms.
Sincerely,
George W. Bush
Campaign Finance Reform
President Bush's Reform Principles
Protect Rights of Individuals to Participate in Democracy: President Bush believes democracy is first and foremost about the rights of individuals to express their views. He supports strengthening the role of individuals in the political process by: 1) updating the limits established more than two decades ago on individual giving to candidates and national parties; and 2) protecting the rights of citizen groups to engage in issue advocacy.
Maintain Strong Political Parties: President Bush believes political parties play an essential role in making America's democratic system operate. He wants to maintain the strength of parties, and not to weaken them. Any reform should help political parties more fully engage citizens in the political process and encourage them to express their views and to vote.
Ban Corporate and Union Soft Money: Corporations and labor unions spend millions of dollars every election cycle in unregulated 'soft? money to influence federal elections. President Bush supports a ban on unregulated corporate and union contributions of soft money to political parties.
Eliminate Involuntary Contributions: President Bush believes no one should be forced to support a candidate or cause against his or her will. He therefore supports two parallel reforms: 1) legislation to prohibit corporations from using treasury funds for political activity without the permission of shareholders; and 2) legislation to require unions to obtain authorization from each dues-paying worker before spending those dues on activities unrelated to collective bargaining.
Require Full and Prompt Disclosure: President Bush also believes that in an open society, the best safeguard against abuse is full disclosure. He supports full, prompt and constitutionally permissible disclosure of contributions and expenditures designed to influence the outcome of federal elections, so voters will have complete and timely information on which to make informed decisions.
Promote Fair, Balanced, Constitutional Approach: President Bush believes reform should not favor any one party over another or incumbents over challengers. Both corporations and unions should be prohibited from giving soft money to political parties, and both corporations and unions should have to obtain permission from their stockholders or dues-paying workers before spending treasury funds or dues on politics. President Bush supports including a non-severability provision, so if any provision of the bill is found unconstitutional, the entire bill is sent back to Congress for further adjustments and deliberations. This provision will ensure fair and balanced campaign finance reform.
Well gee Jim, that was a year ago and that was before that petition Shays slammed through. If you and Clarity can see the future so clearly can you all give me a stock tip to put my money in Monday where I can make a million dollars?
This is your forum Jim, but calling him a liar is a bit harsh, IMHO.
But like I said it's your forum and you can beleive and partake in the hyperbole. It is a free country.
Yeah like who? Who is going to take over the war effort, Rumsfeld is not going to be in a Hillary administration. Yep let's just change administrations, because of a minor issue.
The more things change the more things stay the same. 1991 Bush has Saddam Hussein in a corner but there is a minor recession and the handgernade with a bad haircut "comes" to the rescue, only to usher in the Clintons.
Sheesh, no wonder the right has derservedly earned the nickname, "reactionaries".
All that I can say is; I sure as hell don't want to see our country turned back over to the (can't use the real terminology here) democRATs again. I doubt that we could survive that.
I am going to talk of controversial things. I make no apology for this.I have chosen. The line is in the sand. I will do what is right.It's time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, "We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government."
This idea? that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream-the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, "The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits."
The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.
...
They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. Winston Churchill said that "the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits-not animals." And he said, "There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.
Ronald W. Reagan, "A Time for Choosing"
Your current attitude is a slippery slope down the hill to sure political death. Lately, Republicans have been doing nothing over gradual, but more rapidly increasing erosions on our Constitutional Rights. We as a Party, should not even have to debate CFR and George W. Bush should not even appear to be struggling over this issue. A true statesman would have said "no" right away to this piece of garbage, instead of playing the political pandering game. I as a voter, am growing very weary of this shameful game.
Your behavior on this issue, along with many others, reminds me of a hoard of Lemmings, who will follow each other down the slippery slope of complacency to political death without even seeing these horrible ramifications before hand. My alligence to George W. Bush and the Republican Party depends on their loyalty and alligence to true conservative principles and their respect for me, the one who helped elect then/him into office.
Who?
Trent Lott?
McConnell?
Powell?
Buchanon?
Watts?
LOL! I know, Kool-Aid and Lemmings, both descriptions fit the profile very well.
Hell no, that would never cross Jesse's mind.
Their reactions kinda of remind me of that old 60's song chorus,
"La, La, La, let's live for today"
Replace the word "bitch" for "live" in the above italicized passage and you get the mindset, IMHO.
Forget "Plastics" ... I'd stick to any corporation to which the Federales are giving more than a million a year ... such as ACT cell technologies.
If Bush's decision on ESCR pans out ... drawing the "best and the brightest" to work on his set of stem cell lines from "already been killed" human embryos ... we could be talking some serious money.
Bioethics, defense contractors and outfits like Checkpoint who'll be making beaucoup use of their privacy-invading technologies all ought to be hot in a "war-time" economy.
In a pinch, you could always just analyze which stocks Public Servants like Rumsfeld are loathe to part with when rotating back in from the Private Sector or tag along on the Carlyle Group's coattails.
Call your boss, you'll need $15,000 dollars to pull it off though
Well when a previous part of a state law mimicked the most vile part of the current CFR went up against the Supreme Court in 2000, it was knocked down by the current Supreme court 6-3.
Even Rush mentioned that yesterday.
The special is two for one tinfoil threads. You all would get much better business if you provided free wings, IMHO.
March 15, 2001
The Honorable Trent Lott
Senate Majority Leader
S-230, The Capitol
Washington, DC 20510Dear Senator Lott:
As the Senate prepares to consider campaign finance reform legislation, I wanted to highlight my principles for reform. I am committed to working with the Congress to ensure that fair and balanced campaign reform legislation is enacted.
These principles represent my framework for assessing campaign finance reform legislation. End snip
Eliminate Involuntary Contributions: President Bush believes no one should be forced to support a candidate or cause against his or her will. He therefore supports two parallel reforms: 1) legislation to prohibit corporations from using treasury funds for political activity without the permission of shareholders; and 2) legislation to require unions to obtain authorization from each dues-paying worker before spending those dues on activities unrelated to collective bargaining.
Jim: Here is what Bush said a year ago about what he would require for CFR, including:
"Eliminate Involuntary Contributions: President Bush believes no one should be forced to support a candidate or cause against his or her will. He therefore supports two parallel reforms: 1) legislation to prohibit corporations from using treasury funds for political activity without the permission of shareholders; and 2) legislation to require unions to obtain authorization from each dues-paying worker before spending those dues on activities unrelated to collective bargaining."
He lied. No new liars!
-BLB
Framework for assessing.... That lie is where. A year ago he was trying to get things included, imo. I don't see a thing about requirement in this statement anywhere.
"Exactly. Bush never said that he would veto CFR"
21 posted on 3/21/02 7:31 AM Pacific by Dane
Source
Rush Limbaugh might be a great radio talk-show host, but I do not consider him an authority on American Constitutional Law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.