Thursday, May 27, 2010

Amendment To Limit Corporate Campaign Funds

HJ 74 IH


111th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. J. RES. 74

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States permitting Congress and the States to regulate the expenditure of funds by corporations engaging in political speech.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 2, 2010

Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland (for herself and Mr. CONYERS) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States permitting Congress and the States to regulate the expenditure of funds by corporations engaging in political speech.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

`Article--

`Section 1. The sovereign right of the people to govern being essential to a free democracy, Congress and the States may regulate the expenditure of funds for political speech by any corporation, limited liability company, or other corporate entity.

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




Posted using ShareThis

Friday, May 21, 2010

OpEdNews - Article: What BP's Blocking of CBS Crew Means for Americans

by Kevin Gosztola

This is pretty much a "must read" at OpEd News, which is rising rapidly in my estimation because of statements like this one, at the end of this piece:
At a time when surveillance is entirely acceptable and normal, when cameras at traffic intersections photograph those running red lights, when cameras watch your every move in city, state, federal or private buildings, when street cameras track movements of people in areas thought to have high levels of crime, the public must decide whether it will or should assert its right to survey and cover anything in the same way that authorities, corporations or organizations would assert their right to survey and cover anything.

The democratization of media makes it possible for all of us to be, at least, amateur journalists. Coverage of events no longer has to be left up to officially recognized news organizations (see OpEdNews.com and countless other Internet news sites for further examples).

Coincidentally, other outlets are voicing concerns about this problem, too. Joel Simon of CJR, doesn't go far enough, though, in pointing the finger of blame at the corporate chiefs:
In seeking to stem the flow of information online, governments have exploited vulnerabilities at each step in the journalism process: the gathering, dissemination, and consumption of news.


Posted using ShareThis

Thursday, May 20, 2010

On reality and bitter truths - Reality Asserts Itself

We can't always know everything we're talking about,
[b]ut we can strive to base our opinions on evidence.


Posted using ShareThis

Saturday, May 15, 2010

Eaarth

There's something really refreshing about Bill McKibbon's book, Eaarth. Unfortunately, it's the kind of refreshing like,
Now that I've found out things really are as bad as I have suspected for a long time, I don't have to worry about whether or not it's just me.

He says that we've passed the point where we can avoid serious change, but he's working to prevent climate change from causing complete chaos.

He mentions the melting of the ice caps, the expansion of the tropics with resultant desertification, and ocean acidification as the three primary effects we have to deal with at present.

Yeah, eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and you get driven out of the garden every damn time!

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Dear Senators and Representatives,

It is much too late for Congress to put more strict regulations in place for the coal and oil industries, or to make them safer and more accountable for the damage they do. A ban on new offshore drilling won't prevent destruction of our environment from spreading.

Oil and coal are fossil fuels that produce heat trapping gasses when burned. As those gasses collect in the atmosphere, they cause what is known as "The Greenhouse Effect." This is the trapping of heat in the atmosphere and resultant rise in termperatures in direct proportion to the quantity of gas emitted from burning the fuels that remains in the atmosphere.

The earth can absorb excess CO2, but its ability to buffer the excess is shrinking as oceans acidify and forests are cut down.

As tragic as the current Gulf Disaster is, it will matter little in the long run if global average temperatures increase by 5-7 degrees this century. That is the conservative estimate for an atmosphere with 750 ppm CO2 by 2100.

It could be more.

The bad news is that even if we drastically reduce our emissions to align the world with the goal of 350 ppm by century's end, the damage WE ALREADY HAVE DONE IS IRREVERSIBLE.

The investment squandered on drilling and exploration, not to mention cleanup, represents a great opportunity cost to the human race, and the entire planet in our charge.

This cost can never be repaid. It's toll is growing higher and higher every day we continue to resource the retrieval and combustion of fossil fuels.

Congress must pass legislation that jumpstarts the clean energy revolution. Half measures, loopholes, and giveaways to polluters won't cut it this time. Now is the moment for action.