Independent Discussion Guidelines
What is Three ($3) Dollars going to buy me a voice in Congress with....NOTHING!
dou4now (anonymous profile)April 7, 2015 at 4:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I sold all of my Clinton $3 bills to some guy on eBay.
nativeson (anonymous profile)April 7, 2015 at 6:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
That was funny.
This is an excellent question. It should be the first question an employer asks a potential employee. Says a lot about a person's decision making process!
touristunfriendly (anonymous profile)April 8, 2015 at 5:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As often misunderstood, no one gives any money to this, unlike the dozens of options for fiscal contributions on the State tax return.
It is just an opinion poll that the general Treasury should contribute $3 to qualifying presidential campaigns.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)April 8, 2015 at 8:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
From w doesn't add to your taxes. The questions means: would you like to spend $3 on a public campaign fund, designed to discourage candidates from accepting private donations or would you like $3 to be spent on other things.
From fec.gov "Checking the "yes" box does not increase the amount of tax you owe, nor does it decrease any refund to which you are entitled."
SBexpat (anonymous profile)April 22, 2015 at 10:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Barry Soetoro in early 2008 originally promised up front he would only use federal campaign dollars, and John McCain agreed as well.
Then Barry in typical fashion backed out, pretended he never agreed in the first place and got funded primarily by SEIU and the unions to outspend McCain, who was stuck having to work within the pre-agreed limits.
Clinton is already saying she intended to raise over two billion dollars so any federal campaign funds for 2016 are now essentially moot.
Spend a little time thinking about what all that campaign money buys since each of us have only one vote, and Citzens United does not vote. The Koch Bros have only two votes. So why has money become so important - what does it really buy?
JarvisJarvis (anonymous profile)April 22, 2015 at 10:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Spend a little time thinking deeper, since we know that campaign money buys ads, and after Citizens United there are no effective limits, and now our military democracy is openly for sale. You worship money more than most,JJ, so your pseudo-rhetorical ending is total blarney and BS. Hey, go shoot some fish in a barrel.
DavyBrown (anonymous profile)April 22, 2015 at 12:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Gasp, you mean Citizens United can now allow other political interest groups to achieve campaign cash parity with the public employee union members who had an open, unopposed field to buy voter interest in the past?
Never overlook who the largest special interest groups have long been in our local, state and federal political scene - yup, you guessed it - the public employee union members in all their various "feel good vote for me" guises.
Why not, they absolutely have the most to gain putting their friends on both sides of the bargaining table when it comes to carving up the public trough.
Don't blame them. But don't blame other tax-payer interest groups to also want a fair shot at this process too. Some for their own selfish reasons and some because they truly do want to stop the debt and staunch the leaks. Choose carefully, so you know the difference.
You however are correcto-mundo Davy about one thing. I was utterly duplicitous in my sly query. It was a slow pitch and you batted it out of the park, as hoped.
JarvisJarvis (anonymous profile)April 22, 2015 at 1:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)