Next up for House Rules: ending taxpayer funding for presidential campaigns

[Joanne98]

Source: The Hill

The House Rules Committee next week will hold a meeting to consider H.R. 359, which would end taxpayer funding for presidential campaigns and party conventions.

The Committee announced tonight that it would take up this bill on Tuesday at 10 a.m. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), and Republicans estimate it would save $520 million over ten years.

According to information on House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), the bill would require all presidential candidates to "rely on private donations rather than tax dollars" through the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. The proposal is featured as part of Cantor's "You Cut" project that allows people to suggest and vote on ways to trim federal spending.


Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/139245-next-up-for-house-rules-ending-taxpayer-funding-for-presidential-campaigns

---

Citizens United part two!

[subterranean]

1. Wow, it'll save a whole $52 million a year!!

That'll put a real dent in the deficit! :sarcasm:

[rfranklin]

2. Private donations = corporate bribes...

The best government money can buy!

[glinda]

5. Coinciding ironically with Ca. Harper's proposal.

[Laelth]

9. Precisely.

The neo-libs are global, and they try the same strategies in every nation state that they think might be amenable to their efforts to solidify their oligarchy.

-Laelth

[glinda]

10. Their "canvas" will be controll over Ca., US and Mexico. All for oil, gas, mining, logging.

With Murdock as the tool.

[Roy Rolling]

3. got smart in 4 years

4 years ago when Republicans ruled both houses, they couldn't find a single money-saving bill. Now that they've spent the money they wanted and there's nothing left, it's time to cut. Well duh....

How about the bloated war budget and unnecesary wars? How much are they proposing to cut from there? Right, they won't cut that as long as the campaign money keeps rolling in from war contractors and their Chamber of Commerce pimps.

They manage budgets like a heroin addict manages resources---they will ignore the $100 a day drug expense but try to save $1 a day on syringes by reusing needles.

[geckosfeet]

4. What does this say about the corporate funding via citizens united?

How does taxpayer funding break down along party lines - that is - how many repubs vs dems actually donate on their tax forms?

I used to but have not for years.

My concern is a weakening of the economic voice of the citizen due to the overwhelming volume of the corporate economic voice.

[bowens43]

6. cons continue their campaign

to make the USA a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America.

First there lapdogs in the supreme court rule that corporations can give unlimited money to their pet politicians and then the repugs set out make sure that only those who can be bought can be elected.

these people are truly disgusting.

[fascisthunter]

7. those of you who are conservative, tells us all how this is good for a democracy

I dare you.

SO it's ok for billionaires and corporations to buy to pay for our election process, but it isn't ok for our commons to pay for it. You folks don't want a democracy, you want a fascist government run by corporations and billionaires. You want money to decide everything.

[WhiteTara]

8. well hey...let's really demand the flood gates of

private donations be opened wider so that no work is done for the country only for elections.

[defendandprotect]

11. Legitimizing and ensuring that only criminal corporate political activity succeeds ....

and making clear that they continue to FEAR the power of the public to finance

their own candidates!

[bluestateguy]

12. Neither side is going to take the money next year anyway

The federal matching money will not be accepted by either side in 2012, and that was anticipated before any of this proposal.