HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Scuba » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU
Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: Thu Apr 29, 2010, 03:31 PM
Number of posts: 40,128

Journal Archives

Am I the only one that thinks Bernie's Amendment doesn't go far enough?

It does not - unless I'm missing something - prevent someone like the Koch's from spending billions and billions to buy elections.

It does not get the rigable electronic systems out of the mix.

It does rely on Congress to do something about these problems.

Why go to the trouble of a Constitutional Amendment for crying out loud, if you still have to rely on Congress?

A Constitutional Amendment should solve the whole damned problem or why bother.

I like this version being promoted by Michael Moore better...



A constitutional amendment that fixes our broken electoral system by 1) completely removing campaign contributions from the political process; 2) requiring all elections to be publicly financed; 3) moving election day to the weekend to increase voter turnout; 4) making all Americans registered voters at the moment of their birth; 5) banning computerized voting and requiring that all elections take place on paper ballots.


What is it that I'm missing????

Here's Bernie's proposal...


Wisconsin: Kathleen Falk takes it to Scott Walker - "Walker has not been honest"



One of the most frequent comments I hear as I travel the state is: "I never would have voted for him if I had known what he was going to do."

In March, the Journal Sentinel Editorial Board noted that "Walker never campaigned on disenfranchising public-employee unions. If he had, he would not have been elected. He got a spare 52% of the vote - hardly a mandate for what he is trying to do."

Walker did not need to throw away 50 years of workers' rights to balance the budget. In describing his attack on collective bargaining as the only way to fix the budget, he ignored the concessions on pensions and health insurance agreed to by the unions, he concealed his wholly partisan motivation and he knowingly misled Wisconsinites.

He said during the campaign that he didn't intend to cut kids off health care, but he has. The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau noted that Walker's cuts will mean 65,000 people, 29,000 of them children, will lose access to their current health care. Walker said he would maintain the state's commitment to fund education that keeps our schools strong but then proposed the largest cuts to education in Wisconsin history.


Ms. Falk is one of several names being tossed about as a candidate to oppose Walker WHEN (not if) the recall election occurs (best estimate: not ealier than May, 2012). She does a great job of calling out Governor Koch, er, Walker in this OP.

In my humble opinion, she would make a great governor.
Go to Page: 1