GA Minutes – 3 April 2012

Committee Reports

Finance

We now have about $742 in the bank. Thanks to two generous donations. One from Edmonds Universal Unitarian Church for $100and a private donation of $500. Anthony also paid the county $50 for the electricity at the Community Tent. We have also sold out all the coffee cups but still have mouse pads left. There was talk of the $300 worth of coffee cups to be donated. Anthony mentioned that was promised by the person who donated the $500. He is going to find out if the donation was to be used for the cups or will it be a separate donation.

Tactical

The County has sent us our permit for the community tent which is good through 9/30

The rest of the group reports covered pretty much the same thing discussed at the last GA.

IT

It was brought up that our website seemed to be bland and that it was hard to find any information on our FB page. We discussed ways to make us more visible online including keeping events updated on FB as well as our website. We are going to work on staring a weekly email listing upcoming events and meetings.

New Business

Mike Caldwell proposed that we should resign and disband Occupy Everett. His hopes would be that new blood would help revitalize the movement. This was soundly defeated. This lead to an open discussion about the issue and what to do about it.

The gist of the discussion was there were people that had too much on their plate and we needed to let more people help out with the details of the organization. It was decided that we needed to improve our presence on the internet. Utilizing the event feature on FB more in the coming weeks. Trying to stay focused on the main issue of Occupy, the greed on corruption of wall street, Banks, SuperPac money in politics and foreclosures. We had the numbers last fall when we started and this may help people come back.

Setting set meeting times for all the group meetings keeping in mind that most people will not be able to make afternoon meetings that early evenings would be better.

More involvement in the community from handing out flayers at local events. Doing community work like cleaning up parks. Setting up booths at local events like farmers markets, local and city neighborhood events. Get the Democracy station up and running.

Most important is plan rallies and events to give people something to come and join us for.

Things to discuss at the next GA

  • 501(c)
  • Foreclosure group
  • starting the email updates
  • Scheduling group meetings
  • setting criteria for proposals, when we discuss proposals for actions and events we need to decide the whats, when , who and how of the matter so we have something tangible to go back to the people with.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

GA Minutes – March 27th 2012

Committee Reports

Visibility

The Action Saturday 3/24 on the 23rd and Summit overpass was successful lot of response from the drivers on I-5. There was a collision right under the banners so it was discussed on whether to move future actions to another over pass due to the configuration of the lanes. We do not want to add to the confusion. Lake City Occupy has asked us to join them for in inter-action event. It was discussed that it might be a good idea to reach out to other occupy groups to coordinate future visibility actions with them in Everett and other cities and neighborhoods. This might add numbers to the smaller Occupy’s actions.

Finance

The bank account has just over $300, we picked up $42 in donations from the Firewheel. Officials at our bank, Mountain Pacific Bank want to review how our account was set up. They think we may need to set up a charter and apply for a 501(c) 3 or 4 in order for them to carry our account. They gave us 6 months. The cost of setting this up is $300 and we would need a charter and board of directors. We are going to contact our lawyer to find out just how to go about it. The plus is that people would be able to deduct any donations that they make. Anthony will make up a chart to show the differences between a 501(c)3 and a 501(c)4 and report back on a later date. Jean at the Firewheel has pledged to donate coffee cups for fund raising. We discussed setting up tables at local events and maybe the Mukilteo ferry terminal. Mike Caldwell did mention that he had production equipment for making t-shirts, mouse pads and other fund raising merchandise.

Tactical/Visibility

OUR Washington had asked us to postpone the Lake Stevens foreclosure action for the 23rd. The home owner was in poor health and would not be able to be there. It was decided that since she wasn’t going to make it it would be best to go along with Our Washington. It was discussed that we should use this time to contact people in the neighborhood to join us in the action. A couple of neighbors on the cul de sac had offered there yards for us to put up tents where we would not have any problems with the police. This would not be for overnight camping, but for a symbolic gesture. If we got enough of the neighborhood involved we could hold a block party and if we have enough numbers the police usually stand back and let it happen.

Several members attended a non-violent civil disobedience training forum put on by 99% Spring. The training included mock protests, role playing then analysis of how it went. There will be a training at Everett Station 5/14 at 10am and it is strongly suggested people try to make it if the can. Mike said the training he went through was very professional and informative.

GMOP

Still working on getting documented support from key politicians of legislative bodies. Met with Everett City council as was basically told they would wait and see how other groups acted on this. The next step may be to contact the different neighborhood groups to garner their support and put pressure on the city council to act.

New business

Mikes friend Ann sent cookies and a card thanking us for all the hard work we have been doing for Occupy. It was unanimous, the cookies were good. Thank you Ann.

There was more talk of joining forces with other Occupy groups for joint demonstrations. Bringing more bodies and build a network and create more actions. Trying for weekly visibility actions.

Anthony proposed that we have a visibility action at Comcast Arena on April 14th. John Boultan is going to speak at a Republican fund raiser. This is on the same day as the 99% Spring training. We could learn how to demonstrate and then try out our new found skills that night. More to come later

Editors note.

I must apologize for being so late on posting these minutes. Due to an on going family health issue and other pre planned commitment today is the first time I have a chance to do this. This means what happened at the meeting is no longer fresh in my mind and I tried to decipher my notes but it isn’t fresh any more. I apologize if I missed anything but I believe I got the gist of the maters

dep

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

GA Minutes – March 20th 2012

Occupy Everett General Assembly Minutes 20 March 2012

6 occupiers present at the Community Tent

Visibility:

  1. Occupy Everett protested in support of a Lk. Stevens woman whose furnishings had been set out on the street while she was hospitalized for cancer treatment.  We displayed the “Stop Illegal Bank Foreclosures” banner and assisted her relatives and neighbors in loading her belongings and transporting them to a storage facility.  Video of the action was posted on Facebook.  King 5’s Jessie James has inquired about the case.  Michelle Darnell of “Follow the Money” will be following up on this case as well.  A session of bannering is scheduled for noon to 3pm on Saturday Mar 24 at the 23rdStreet overpass in Everett.
  2. Possibilities for a Mayday block party were discussed.  The KSER parking lot is owned by Jimmy’s On Broadway and would require their permission.  Also KSER would need to be involved in any activities that go on in their parking lot.
  3. Sierra informed us that Ed Mast has written a play called “Voices of Occupy Seattle” which is about 40 minutes long and could be brought to Everett, perhaps the FB&B, for performance. A 2 pm Saturday performance (sometime within the coming month) was discussed.  Mike C. will contact Ed Mast.

Tactical:

  1. Our permit for the Community Tent expires at the end of March.  A meeting has been scheduled with the county to request extension thru September.

Open Stack:

  1. Motion to switch the Facebook over to the new “timeline” format was passed.  This will happen involuntarily at some time in the near future anyway.
  2. A “Cash Mob” to benefit FB&B will be studied.
  3. There is a meeting with Peter Jackson (Scoop Jackson’s son) Monday at 6pm at FB&B to discuss the creation of a public speaking forum in Everett.

Minutes by KRD

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

GA Minutes – March 13th 2012

Committee Reports:

Finance:

  1. After paying the March electric bill, the balance in our account at Mountain Pacific Bank is $317.25.
  2. Anthony will explore the requirements for tax filing and options for becoming a tax exempt non-profit.

Visability:

  1. We have had 4 recent actions:
    • Two bannering sessions at the I-5 overpass at 23rd St in Everett. Banners read, “Tar sands oil line = bad gas.”
    • In Seattle we supported the Sierra Club and Seattle Tar Sands Action with this banner.
    • Chase Bank was bannered to support the Chase 5 with a banner reading “Stop bank fraud foreclosures.”
  2. The Buzz on Friday the 16th of March will be a St. Patty’s day celebration with corned beef, cabbage and potatoes. A jug band will be playing and we’ll be working on a new banner reading “Get dirty money out of politics.”
    • The Buzz takes place on Friday evenings at the Firewheel Books and Beans coffee house at 2820 Oakes Ave, Everett, WA from 5pm to 9pm.
    • The Buzz is an opportunity for anyone to come in, talk politics, participate in projects, meet like-minded folks and find out what’s happening on the political action scene.
    • AM 1090 has been requested to advertise the Buzz.

Tactical:

  1. Motion to draft a letter to Gary Haaken requesting a meeting. Anthony will arrange this. Motion passed.
  2. Get Money Out of Politics (GMOP) work group
    • Has been meeting at 7 pm at the FB&B on Thursdays for the past 5 weeks. Any interested people are invited to attend.
    • The mission is to make it clear to elected officials at the Federal and State level that there is popular support for an amendment to the US Constitution to overturn the Supreme Courts Citizens United decision.
      1. We have begun meeting with Snohomish County Council members about adopting a resolution of support
      2. Similar efforts with the Everett City Council will begin soon Individual letters of support have been sent to every seated
      3. Washington State legislator for their signatures. Representative Mike Sels and Senator Nick Harper have already signed on.
      4. We continue to discuss the various approaches to the issue of money in politics and our meetings have been lively and informative.

New Business:

  1. Motion: Occupy Everett will conduct a Mayday event during the Mayday weekend in support of Seattle and other Occupy groups. Passed
    • a. A working group for this event will be headed up by Gary (425-339-8227).
  2. Please call if you want to work on this.
    • We will inquire about having the event in the parking lot of KSER.
  3. Sierra has written a play about people who occupy some abandoned buildings and wants to perform the play at the FB&B.
    • Motion: Occupy Everett endorses this event and will help make it happen. Passed.
    • Schedule to be arranged with FB&B.

Adjourned.

Minutes by KRD

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Occupy Everett Stands with Occupy Oakland

Occupy Everett stands in solidarity with the brothers and sisters of Occupy Oakland. The Occupy movement has brought the grossly skewed distribution of wealth to the general public’s attention and made the statement that the 99% will no longer quietly tolerate their government being operated by and for the wealthiest 1%. But perhaps even more important, the movement has caused municipalities all over the country to reveal how little provocation it takes to elicit a brutal police response. And nowhere has this been more pronounced than in Oakland. Ninja suited police seemingly feel free to assault unarmed demonstrators with impunity while wearing and wielding equipment that was no doubt purchased with “Homeland Security” dollars intended to combat terrorists.
When great numbers of a nation’s own citizens express discontent it should provoke a serious examination of public policy. Not police brutality. There is something rotten in Oakland and because of this Occupy Everett stands in solidarity with the brothers and sisters of Occupy Oakland.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Citizens United Amendments: A Survey of Proposed Amendments

 

The most promising method of overturning the Supreme Court’s disastrous Citizens United decision appears to be through a Constitutional Amendment.  That said, the exact language of an amendment is still the subject of considerable debate.  And there is the possibility of correcting more than just the “corporate personhood” problem.  It will be a long time before we have to settle on specific language.  The job right now is to create and organize citizen concern over this issue and sentiment for an amendment to correct it.   But it is not too early to start learning about  the characteristics of various proposals and thinking about the best way to frame an amendment so it accomplishes what we want and does not bring on unanticipated consequences.  Like most things, it’s a bit more complicated than might appear at first glance.

There are already over a dozen proposed amendments that have been initiated in Congress or are being promoted by various interest groups.  This is great.  It means the momentum is already growing. However,  I know it appears daunting to read them.  Shortly I intend to create a summary matrix that should make it easier to compare the characteristics of the various options.  But for now, just look at them so you are aware of the various ideas that have been put forth and can start thinking about them.

The Seagull

Summary of Constitutional Amendment proposals in Congress
related to overturning the Citizens United v. FEC decision
by the U.S. Supreme Court
As of January 20, 2012
In the U.S. House:
H.J.Res.6 – By Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.6:

This proposed amendment says that the Constitution’s First Amendment does not apply to businesses
when campaign expenditures are involved. It also allows Congress and the states to limit campaign
donations and expenditures, as well as independent expenditures, for federal and state elections,
respectively.

Article–
Section 1. The first article of amendment does not apply to the political speech of any corporation,
partnership, business trust, association, or other business organization with respect to the making of
contributions, expenditures, or other disbursements of funds in connection with public elections.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to set limits on the amount of contributions that may be accepted
by, and the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to, a candidate
for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal office.

Section 3. A State shall have power to set limits on the amount of contributions that may be accepted by,
and the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to, a candidate for
nomination for election to, or for election to, State or local office.

Section 4. Congress shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

H.J.Res.7 – By Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.7:

This proposed amendment is a stand-alone first part of H.J.Res.6, limiting First Amendment “rights” for
businesses with regard to campaign expenditures.

H.J.Res.8 – By Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.8:

This proposed amendment is a stand-alone second portion of H.J.Res.6. It would authorize Congress
and the states to limit campaign donations and expenditures, as well as independent expenditures, for
federal and state elections, respectively.

H.J.Res.65 – by Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.65:

This proposed amendment would prohibit candidates from accepting donations from anyone who
doesn’t live in the district or state the candidate wants to represent. It says nothing about limited
contributions from businesses, however.

Article–
Section 1. A candidate for election for the office of Senator may not accept contributions, including funds
and in-kind equivalents, from individuals who do not reside in the State the candidate seeks to represent.

Section 2. A candidate for election for the office of Representative in, or Delegate or Resident
Commissioner to, the Congress may not accept contributions, including funds and in-kind equivalents,
from individuals who do not reside in the Congressional district the candidate seeks to represent.

Section 3. Congress shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

H.J.Res.72 – by Kurt Schrader (D-OR)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.72:

This proposed amendment would give Congress full power to regulate and limit donations, expenditures
and independent expenditures for federal elections, and authorize states to do the same for state
elections. The only limit to this power is that any action Congress takes must apply “equally and
uniformly” to all individuals or “associations.”

Article–
Section 1. The Congress shall have power to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate the contribution of
funds or donation of in-kind equivalents to candidates standing for election to a Federal office in the
United States and to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate the expenditure of funds or donation of in-kind equivalents used to support or purchase media advertisements intended to influence the outcome of an election for Federal office in the United States. Whenever Congress should exercise such power, it must apply equally and uniformly to all individual persons recognized as citizens of the United States.
Whenever Congress should exercise such power on associations of citizens of the United States, it must
apply equally and uniformly to all associations of citizens of the United States.

Section 2. Each of the several States shall have power to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate the
contribution of funds or donation of in-kind equivalents to candidates standing for election to public office
in the State and to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate expenditure of funds or donation of in-kind
equivalents used to support or purchase media advertisements intended to influence the outcome of an
election for public office or plebiscite in the State. Whenever a State should exercise such power, it must apply equally and uniformly to all individual persons recognized as citizens of the State.
Whenever a State should exercise such power on associations of citizens of the State, it must apply
equally and uniformly to all associations of citizens of the State.

Section 3. A person who is not a citizen of the United States, including an association of persons who are
not citizens of the United States, a foreign government, or any person acting as an agent thereof, may not contribute funds or donate in-kind equivalents to candidates standing for election to public office in the United States or otherwise expend funds or donate in-kind equivalents in a manner intended to influence the outcome an election for public office or plebiscite in the United States.

Section 4. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

H.J.Res.78 – by Rep. Donna Edwards (D-MD)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.78:

24 cosponsors (as of 11-22-11), including Jim McDermott (D-WA 7th), who added his name Nov. 16th.
This proposed amendment would authorize Congress and the states to put “content-neutral” limits on
political spending by corporations.

Article–
Section 1. Nothing in this Constitution shall prohibit Congress and the States from imposing contentneutral regulations and restrictions on the expenditure of funds for political activity by any corporation, limited liability company, or other corporate entity, including but not limited to contributions in support of, or in opposition to, a candidate for public office.

Section 2. Nothing contained in this Article shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.

H.J.Res.72 – by Kurt Schrader (D-OR)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.72:

This proposed amendment would give Congress full power to regulate and limit donations, expenditures
and independent expenditures for federal elections, and authorize states to do the same for state
elections. The only limit to this power is that any action Congress takes must apply “equally and
uniformly” to all individuals or “associations.”

Article–
Section 1. The Congress shall have power to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate the contribution of
funds or donation of in-kind equivalents to candidates standing for election to a Federal office in the
United States and to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate the expenditure of funds or donation of in-kind equivalents used to support or purchase media advertisements intended to influence the outcome of an election for Federal office in the United States. Whenever Congress should exercise such power, it must apply equally and uniformly to all individual persons recognized as citizens of the United States.
Whenever Congress should exercise such power on associations of citizens of the United States, it must
apply equally and uniformly to all associations of citizens of the United States.

Section 2. Each of the several States shall have power to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate the
contribution of funds or donation of in-kind equivalents to candidates standing for election to public office
in the State and to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate expenditure of funds or donation of in-kind
equivalents used to support or purchase media advertisements intended to influence the outcome of an
election for public office or plebiscite in the State. Whenever a State should exercise such power, it must apply equally and uniformly to all individual persons recognized as citizens of the State. Whenever a State should exercise such power on associations of citizens of the State, it must apply
equally and uniformly to all associations of citizens of the State.

Section 3. A person who is not a citizen of the United States, including an association of persons who are
not citizens of the United States, a foreign government, or any person acting as an agent thereof, may not contribute funds or donate in-kind equivalents to candidates standing for election to public office in the United States or otherwise expend funds or donate in-kind equivalents in a manner intended to influence the outcome an election for public office or plebiscite in the United States.

Section 4. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

H.J.Res.78 – by Rep. Donna Edwards (D-MD)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.78:

24 cosponsors (as of 11-22-11), including Jim McDermott (D-WA 7th), who added his name Nov. 16th.
This proposed amendment would authorize Congress and the states to put “content-neutral” limits on
political spending by corporations.

Article–
Section 1. Nothing in this Constitution shall prohibit Congress and the States from imposing content neutral regulations and restrictions on the expenditure of funds for political activity by any corporation,
limited liability company, or other corporate entity, including but not limited to contributions in support of,
or in opposition to, a candidate for public office.

Section 2. Nothing contained in this Article shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.

H.J.Res.72 – by Kurt Schrader (D-OR)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.72:

This proposed amendment would give Congress full power to regulate and limit donations, expenditures
and independent expenditures for federal elections, and authorize states to do the same for state
elections. The only limit to this power is that any action Congress takes must apply “equally and
uniformly” to all individuals or “associations.”

Article–
Section 1. The Congress shall have power to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate the contribution of
funds or donation of in-kind equivalents to candidates standing for election to a Federal office in the
United States and to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate the expenditure of funds or donation of in-kind equivalents used to support or purchase media advertisements intended to influence the outcome of an election for Federal office in the United States. Whenever Congress should exercise such power, it must apply equally and uniformly to all individual persons recognized as citizens of the United States.
Whenever Congress should exercise such power on associations of citizens of the United States, it must
apply equally and uniformly to all associations of citizens of the United States.

Section 2. Each of the several States shall have power to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate the
contribution of funds or donation of in-kind equivalents to candidates standing for election to public office
in the State and to prohibit, limit, and otherwise regulate expenditure of funds or donation of in-kind
equivalents used to support or purchase media advertisements intended to influence the outcome of an
election for public office or plebiscite in the State. Whenever a State should exercise such power, it must apply equally and uniformly to all individual persons recognized as citizens of the State. Whenever a State should exercise such power on associations of citizens of the State, it must apply equally and uniformly to all associations of citizens of the State.

Section 3. A person who is not a citizen of the United States, including an association of persons who are
not citizens of the United States, a foreign government, or any person acting as an agent thereof, may not contribute funds or donate in-kind equivalents to candidates standing for election to public office in the United States or otherwise expend funds or donate in-kind equivalents in a manner intended to influence the outcome an election for public office or plebiscite in the United States.

Section 4. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

H.J.Res.78 – by Rep. Donna Edwards (D-MD)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.78:

24 cosponsors (as of 11-22-11), including Jim McDermott (D-WA 7th), who added his name Nov. 16th.
This proposed amendment would authorize Congress and the states to put “content-neutral” limits on
political spending by corporations.

Article–
Section 1. Nothing in this Constitution shall prohibit Congress and the States from imposing content neutral regulations and restrictions on the expenditure of funds for political activity by any corporation, limited liability company, or other corporate entity, including but not limited to contributions in support of, or in opposition to, a candidate for public office.

Section 2. Nothing contained in this Article shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.

Because it is modest in scope, it may be the bill most likely to move forward at all.
It doesn’t accomplish everything advocates might prefer, but it would authorize Congress to overturn
the Citizens United ruling, and may achieve the most cosponsor support among the various proposals.

H.J.Res.82 – by Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.82:

This proposed amendment would allow Congress and the states to regulate any corporate spending “in
connection with” elections for federal and state offices, respectively.
It is similar to several other proposals, but with simpler language — possibly oversimplified. H.J.Res.82
has something heretofore unseen — a clause ensuring continued freedom of the press. That is
important, so that news services would be allowed to spend money to cover campaigns and elections.

Article–
Section 1. Congress shall have the power to regulate any expenditure by a corporation in connection with
an election for Federal office.

Section 2. Each of the several States shall have the power to regulate any expenditure by a corporation in
connection with an election for State or local public office or a plebiscite in the State.

Section 3. Nothing contained in this Article shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.

H.J.Res.86 – by Rep. Betty Sutton (D-OH).

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.86:

Companion Senate bill — S.J.Res.29
Seven co-sponsors (as of 11-22-11), including Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA 7th).
This proposed amendment would authorize Congress and state legislatures the right to limit campaign
contributions and spending, including independent expenditures, for federal and state elections,
respectively.

Article–
Section 1. Congress shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in kind
equivalents with respect to Federal elections, including through setting limits on–
(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal
office; and
(2) the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such
candidates.

Section 2. A State shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in kind equivalents with respect to State elections, including through setting limits on—

(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, State
office; and

(2) the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such
candidates.

Section 3. Congress shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

H.J.Res.88 – by Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) Note: This is the amendment sponsored by Free Speech for People

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.88:

This proposed amendment would limit the rights enumerated in the Constitution to natural persons, and
specifically not to corporations or other business entities.

Article–
Section 1. We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this
Constitution to be the rights of natural persons.

Section 2. The words people, person, or citizen as used in this Constitution do not include corporations,
limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any State, the United
States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people,
through their elected State and Federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise consistent
with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution.

Section 3. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people’s rights of freedom of speech,
freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, freedom of association and all such other rights of the
people, which rights are inalienable.

H.J.Res.90 – by Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL), 37 co-sponsors including Rick Larsen (D-WA2) and Jim McDermott (D-WA7)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.J.RES.90:

This is the companion bill to Senator Bernie Sanders’ Saving American Democracy Amendment

This proposed amendment makes clear that corporations and other businesses are not protected by the
rights enumerated in the Constitution, but may be regulated to the fullest extent allowed Congress and
the states. It prohibits corporate expenditures for any election, whether for a candidate or a
referendum. Finally, it allows Congress to limit campaign fund raising and spending, effectively
overturning the Supreme Court decision in 1976, Buckley v. Valeo. Of all the proposals so far, it is
perhaps the most sweeping
.
Neither H.J.Res.82, nor H.J.Res.90 have any cosponsors as of 11-18-11.

Article–
Section 1. The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons
and do not extend to for-profit corporations, limited liability companies, or other private entities
established for business purposes or to promote business interests under the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.

Section 2. Such corporate and other private entities established under law are subject to regulation by the people through the legislative process so long as such regulations are consistent with the powers of
Congress and the States and do not limit the freedom of the press.

Section 3. Such corporate and other private entities shall be prohibited from making contributions or
expenditures in any election of any candidate for public office or the vote upon any ballot measure
submitted to the people.

Section 4. Congress and the States shall have the power to regulate and set limits on all election
contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own spending, and to authorize the establishment
of political committees to receive, spend, and publicly disclose the sources of those contributions and
expenditures.

In the U.S. Senate:
S.J.Res. 29 – proposed by Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM).

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.J.RES.29:

Companion House bill — H.J.Res.86

S.J.Res.29 has 16 Senate cosponsors as of 11-23-11 – though not yet Sens. Cantwell or Murray.
It appears to be the only bill introduced in the Senate. This proposed amendment would authorize Congress and state legislatures the right to limit campaign contributions and spending, including independent expenditures, for federal and state elections, respectively.

Because it is modest in scope, it may be the bill most likely to move forward at all.
It doesn’t accomplish everything advocates might prefer, but it would authorize Congress to overturn
the Citizens United ruling, and may achieve the most cosponsor support among the various proposals.

Article—
Section 1. Congress shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in kind
equivalents with respect to Federal elections, including through setting limits on—

(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal
office; and

(2) the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such
candidates.

Section 2. A State shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in kind equivalents with respect to State elections, including through setting limits on—

(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, State
office; and

(2) the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such
candidates.

Section 3. Congress shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Move to Amend’s proposed Amendment:
Move to Amend 28th Amendment
Section 1 [A corporation is not a person and can be regulated]
The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only.
Artificial entities, such as corporations, limited liability companies, and other entities, established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or local law.
The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the People, through Federal, State, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.
Section 2 [Money is not speech and can be regulated]
Federal, State and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own contributions and expenditures, for the purpose of influencing in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure.
Federal, State and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed.
The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be speech under the First Amendment.
Section 3
Nothing contained in this amendment shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.

The following proposed amendment language was suggested by Greg Colvin in a Nov. 2011 article in the Center for Media and Democracy’s PR Watch ( http://www.prwatch.org/news/2011/01/9905/only-people-can-vote-only-people-should-finance-campaigns.) He questions whether declaring that corporations do not have the rights of personhood might go too far and have unintended consequences. Hence the following proposal:
Amendment XXVIII

Section 1. Only natural persons who are citizens of the United States may make contributions and expenditures to influence the exercise of a citizen’s right to vote, although Congress and the States may also institute systems of public financing for election campaigns.

Section 2. Congress and the States shall have concurrent power to implement this article by measures that may set limits on the amounts of each citizen’s contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own spending, and authorize citizens to establish committees to receive, spend, and publicly disclose the sources of contributions and expenditures, and by other appropriate legislation.
Short. Only 95 words.

Senator Bernie Sanders’ proposed “Saving American Democracy Amendment.” Introduced Dec. 8, 2011. One co-sponsor: Mark Begich (D-AK)
ARTICLE—
‘‘SECTION 1. The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons and do not extend to for-profit corporations, limited liability companies, or other private entities established for business purposes or to promote business interests under the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.

‘‘SECTION 2. Such corporate and other private entities established under law are subject to regulation by the people through the legislative process so long as such regulations are consistent with the powers of Congress and the States and do not limit the freedom of the press.
‘‘SECTION 3. Such corporate and other private entities shall be prohibited from making contributions or expenditures in any election of any candidate for public office or the vote upon any ballot measure submitted to the people.

‘‘SECTION 4. Congress and the States shall have the
power to regulate and set limits on all election contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own spending, and to authorize the establishment of political committees to receive, spend, and publicly disclose the sources of those contributions and expenditures.’’

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off