Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics

[McRocket]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

 

[Rustic]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

 

[Aponi]

'Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced a broad anti-corruption bill Tuesday that would, among other things, impose a lifetime lobbying ban on presidents and federal lawmakers, prohibit individual members of Congress from owning stocks and, in a clear jab at President Donald Trump, require presidential candidates to release years of tax returns.

“Washington is corrupt,” Warren said in a video announcing her new legislation, named the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act. “Across the board, our government systematically favors the rich over the poor, the donor class over the working class, the well connected over the disconnected. And that’s why I introduced the most ambitious anti-corruption legislation proposed in Congress since Watergate.”

Warren’s bill would also ban individual members of Congress, senior congressional aides, judges and cabinet secretaries from owning individual stocks and instead force them to invest their money in government-controlled investment accounts — a move that came after GOP Rep. Chris Collins was indicted on insider trading charges.

“Enough of the spectacle of HHS secretaries and herds of congressmen caught up in insider trading schemes,” Warren said at the bill announcement, which she held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., according to CNBC.

Warren’s legislation would also tax “excessive lobbying” expenditures of $500,000 more per year.

Warren said Trump is not the only reason the bill should be passed, adding trust in government began to erode before Trump and his “drain the swamp” message was elected.

“This problem is far bigger than Trump,” Warren said at the bill announcement, according to CNBC. “It is a crisis. A crisis of faith.”

Warren’s legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — which is currently controlled by Republicans. But it lays her stake in the ground for a message should she mount a bid for president in 2020.'

Elizabeth Warren brings anti-corruption bill to “eliminate the influence of money” in politics


Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

Congress has been making billions on insider trading for decades both sides

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Got to admit. I don't hate Pocahontas' bill. I am sure she put something in there to fuck it up, but it is not obvious.

 

[Claudette]

She's just pissing up a rope.

Money is always in politics. Anyone who doesn't believe that is dumber than a box of rocks.

In fact, the box of rocks is smarter than they are.

 

[occupied]

I wish her luck but a law is only the first step in changing the culture in Washington. We as voters need to realize what "business friendly" ends up meaning when we send these people into the midst of a veritable army of industry lobbyists.

 

[Olde Europe]

Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

Several things here.

Of course, Warren't bill will not eliminate all corrupt behavior. Which bill could? That is to say, the argument that a bill is not worth enacting unless 100% successful is invalid.

Moreover, the same applies to your other argument: If you eliminate the simpler, more easily detectable classes of corruption, that leaves the more secretive forms requiring more criminal energy, that is, forcing "corruption farther underground". So, BTW, does your own proposal. That still doesn't mean the simpler forms shouldn't be penalized. Rather, you start with them, and amend legislation to go after the more egregious cases as they occur.

Finally, for your proposal to pass juridical muster, you first need to get rid of a Supreme Court that defines Money spent on campaigns as "speech", and corporations as "persons", involving First Amendment protections. Otherwise, that won't work.

That said, whoever thinks anything related to government ethics that might actually work will pass while McConnell has a say on which bill gets to the Senate floor, hasn't been paying attention.

 

[sparky]

Finally, for your proposal to pass juridical muster, you first need to get rid of a Supreme Court that defines Money spent on campaigns as "speech", and corporations as "persons", involving First Amendment protections. Otherwise, that won't work.

Which has been an ongoing battle ......~S~

 

[McRocket]

Though I agree that corruption is out of control in Washington - it is virtually impossible to eliminate.

So government employees cannot own stock? That does not stop their children/spouses/siblings/parents from owning stock for them (in secret, of course). So that is out the window.

And what about precious metals, bonds, real estate, fine collectibles? What about offshore equities bought from a numbered account in a tax-free haven? Or even American equities (stocks) from the same source?

What about being appointed a board member with a ginormous salary (when they retire) in return for political favors when they were in office? What about the same to family members?

Warren's plan will not work...it will just force corruption farther underground.

I say make it that every person can only give $100 to a candidate's election campaign and corporations can give ZIP (neither money, favors, items..anything).
It won't eliminate corruption - by a mile. But at least it will slow it down.

Several things here.

Of course, Warren't bill will not eliminate all corrupt behavior. Which bill could? That is to say, the argument that a bill is not worth enacting unless 100% successful is invalid.

No one is saying that here...so why mention it?

Moreover, the same applies to your other argument: If you eliminate the simpler, more easily detectable classes of corruption, that leaves the more secretive forms requiring more criminal energy, that is, forcing "corruption farther underground". So, BTW, does your own proposal. That still doesn't mean the simpler forms shouldn't be penalized. Rather, you start with them, and amend legislation to go after the more egregious cases as they occur.

Limiting campaign contributions would not push it underground. How can you donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign if it is illegal to donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign?
You cannot donate promises to a campaign - that won't help someone get elected.
My point was strictly to do with campaign contributions...not any other aspect of corruption in Washington. As I said, that is virtually impossible to stop.

Finally, for your proposal to pass juridical muster, you first need to get rid of a Supreme Court that defines Money spent on campaigns as "speech", and corporations as "persons", involving First Amendment protections. Otherwise, that won't work.

That said, whoever thinks anything related to government ethics that might actually work will pass while McConnell has a say on which bill gets to the Senate floor, hasn't been paying attention.

I don't care about 'judicial muster'. America can pass any law she wants if enough people want it.

BTW - instead of whining what won't work (which anyone can do), why not contribute a suggestion that you think might work/help.

 

[sparky]

Limiting campaign contributions would not push it underground. How can you donate anything but your time (and $100) to a campaign if it is illegal to donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign?
You cannot donate promises to a campaign - that won't help someone get elected.
My point was strictly to do with campaign contributions...not any other aspect of corruption in Washington. As I said, that is virtually impossible to stop.

Bernie did try Mr Rocket , he gained a lot of popularity from those who knew it, especially the younger crowd, but one can't fight big $$ w/ $5 & $10 donations.....~S~

 

[Olde Europe]

I don't care about 'judicial muster'. America can pass any law she wants if enough people want it.

My bad. I didn't realize you were merely fantasizing.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Got to admit. I don't hate Pocahontas' bill. I am sure she put something in there to fuck it up, but it is not obvious.

Something a partisan hack would say....

Just admit a bill like this would have never ever been conceived by a republican.....

 

[McRocket]

Limiting campaign contributions would not push it underground. How can you donate anything but your time (and $100) to a campaign if it is illegal to donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign?
You cannot donate promises to a campaign - that won't help someone get elected.
My point was strictly to do with campaign contributions...not any other aspect of corruption in Washington. As I said, that is virtually impossible to stop.

Bernie did try Mr Rocket , he gained a lot of popularity from those who knew it, especially the younger crowd, but one can't fight big $$ w/ $5 & $10 donations.....~S~

My idea is not an attempt to fight corruption...cannot be (realistically) done.

My idea (that is not original, obviously) is just to keep corruption on the campaign trail to a minimum.

 

[TNHarley]

The problem is the govt is too fucking big. THATS the problem
God forbid someone focus on an actual FIX to something. Anything!

 

[TNHarley]

And the tax return thing is silly and partisan.
But at least the lying bitch did something. I guess.. low standards

 

[McRocket]

I don't care about 'judicial muster'. America can pass any law she wants if enough people want it.

My bad. I didn't realize you are merely fantasizing.

I said/inferred/thought nothing of the sort.

You have a knack for putting words in people's mouths...a sure sign of a lack of intelligence and/or experience.

I am just saying that 'well Duh' it would be hard to pass. But if enough people want it - it will.


And you completely ducked my questions to you...(typical with online trolls - which you seem to be) I shall try again...

How can you donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign if it is illegal to donate anything but your time and $100 to a campaign?

BTW - instead of whining what won't work (which anyone can do), why not contribute a suggestion that you think might work/help.


Let's see it you can get it together enough to answer either coherently or intelligently. My guess is 'no'...but we will see.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

The problem is the govt is too fucking big. THATS the problem
God forbid someone focus on an actual FIX to something. Anything!

What does that even mean? Government is too big? What is the appropriate size for government?

The size of government has ZERO to do with how corruptible it is....a tiny government will just be even easier to buy off

 

[McRocket]

The problem is the govt is too fucking big. THATS the problem
God forbid someone focus on an actual FIX to something. Anything!

It's FAR too big, true.

But even if it was 1/10'th the size it is now...there would still be LOTS of corruption with the laws as they now stand.

 

[TNHarley]

The problem is the govt is too fucking big. THATS the problem
God forbid someone focus on an actual FIX to something. Anything!

What does that even mean? Government is too big? What is the appropriate size for government?

The size of government has ZERO to do with how corruptible it is....a tiny government will just be even easier to buy off

If the fed gov only did their constitutional duties, there would be nothing to corrupt.

 

[TNHarley]

The problem is the govt is too fucking big. THATS the problem
God forbid someone focus on an actual FIX to something. Anything!

It's FAR too big, true.

But even if it was 1/10'th the size it is now...there would still be LOTS of corruption with the laws as they now stand.

Hell man, the laws are part of it. They would have to go too