Many companies have tried to reduce taxes by incorporating abroad -- the so-called Bermuda Inversion. Wouldn't the banning of foreign campaign contributions apply to them?.
I am very hopeful that the Obama will _DEMAND_ that the Congress give him legislation limiting the intrusion of foreign interests into the internal political activities of the United States as a matter of national security.
I do not see this happening, but I feel very strongly that it should. And I also feel that this question needs to be addressed to the American people and that this is a more important issue than is currently being credited. The only SUPREME in this country is the people. The people's House can most certainly impeach a Supreme court justice for poor behavior. Whether that judge is actually removed is of little import. The impeachment of the chief justice is a major statement by the people that cannot be ignored.
But leaving that aside I am convinced that both ownership and taxation must determine the status of an American corporation treated like a "person". This fictitious "person" must be owned by Americans and pay all taxes in America like any other "person" allowed to participate in American politics.
IBM has 70% of its employees overseas. I think such companies should not be allowed to contribute to campaigns, because of their interest in promoting foreign labor.
From what I am seeing the Chinese government can run all the adds it wants in the USA to defeat any Senator that might make a move against its interests. The "swift boat" adds that won the 2006 election for bush are what we can expect. Any and all dirt that can be found on any any senatorial candidate will be blasted across the media by the special interests. It is not the positive ads that matter. Only the mud.
The 17th amendment is the worst "progressive" foot shooting exercise in history. The Senators should be indirectly selected by the state legislatures. It should matter who your state legislators are and they should be picking Senators that represent the people of the state. Not senators that run big media campaigns funded by people outside the state. The indirect process severely cripples the big money.
The guv will 'save us' by creating legislation that will require ads to identify funders. This will make for a built-in liability for candidates who have dubious support. Just more politics. ~ray l love
5 comments:
I am very hopeful that the Obama will _DEMAND_ that the Congress give him legislation limiting the intrusion of foreign interests into the internal political activities of the United States as a matter of national security.
I do not see this happening, but I feel very strongly that it should. And I also feel that this question needs to be addressed to the American people and that this is a more important issue than is currently being credited. The only SUPREME in this country is the people. The people's House can most certainly impeach a Supreme court justice for poor behavior. Whether that judge is actually removed is of little import. The impeachment of the chief justice is a major statement by the people that cannot be ignored.
But leaving that aside I am convinced that both ownership and taxation must determine the status of an American corporation treated like a "person". This fictitious "person" must be owned by Americans and pay all taxes in America like any other "person" allowed to participate in American politics.
IBM has 70% of its employees overseas. I think such companies should not be allowed to contribute to campaigns, because of their interest in promoting foreign labor.
Iwas thinking more about companies like Halliburton, which are headed in Dubai.
From what I am seeing the Chinese government can run all the adds it wants in the USA to defeat any Senator that might make a move against its interests. The "swift boat" adds that won the 2006 election for bush are what we can expect. Any and all dirt that can be found on any any senatorial candidate will be blasted across the media by the special interests. It is not the positive ads that matter. Only the mud.
The 17th amendment is the worst "progressive" foot shooting exercise in history. The Senators should be indirectly selected by the state legislatures. It should matter who your state legislators are and they should be picking Senators that represent the people of the state. Not senators that run big media campaigns funded by people outside the state. The indirect process severely cripples the big money.
The guv will 'save us' by creating legislation that will require ads to identify funders. This will make for a built-in liability for candidates who have dubious support. Just more politics. ~ray l love
Post a Comment