Amendment XXVIII (Official)

Sec 1. is far too wordy and negates the need for your Sec. 4. However it makes a special class of citizen; those in partnerships. We lose one class of dominance to replace it with another. Very bad! Let the partners do their own individual citizen thing. I'm certain I do NOT want a single-citizen-multi-foreigner partnership financing their choice of domestic politics.
DUH!

Sec 2. is confusing for me; exactly what does "not protected acts under the U.S. Constitution" mean in a constitutional setting and why is that wording necessary?

Sec 3. is entirely superfluous to the main thrust, as well as being exceptionally sleep inducing. What the heck does all that talk about rights and obligations, buy, sell, own, dispose of, betaxed, and there is ZERO need to protect the first amendment rights of free speech. Newspaper corporations are not protected by any sort of personhood. Newspapers are protected by the first amendment. There is ample law covering that fact.

Alrighty dudes. I think all the changes permitted by the motions process on the wolfpac site have been made.

If so, from this point on, the new convention process will be in effect.

I think it's important to consider over-all strategy when setting out to remove money from the electoral process. I realize Cenk wants to revoke personhood *and* reform campaign finance; they're both critical to restoring citizen sovereignty. I doubt it can be done simultaneously but I know it can be done sequentially.

The problems I see with an Amendment proposal featuring both concepts simultaneously is that the human mind can't absorb that much philosophy in one sitting. We must remember that whatever we propose here will be turned into both FOX and MSNBC talking points in the most distorted light possible; and they're really good at it. Therefore brevity and simplicity are critical to achieving universal approval. It's going to be hard enough to pass one concept through a ratification process much less two; though we know they're both related.

Election reform has already been legislated several times but corporate money always finds a way to work around it because the Constitution gives them Rights. For that reason I think it is critical to remove those Constitutional Rights before attempting to keep them out of the electoral process. Furthermore, it is quite possible and maybe probable, that electoral reform could be accomplished legislatively once the "tap-root" of corporate power, personhood, is uprooted. Canceling corporate personhood constitutionally not only exposes them to government prosecution, it exposes them to the imposition of terms and conditions on their charters. The People could then define how corporations would participate in politics, if at all. Media corporations would thus have their roles defined differently than political campaign corporations such as Democratic Corp., Republican Corp. or Libertarian Corp. Others, like GE, JPMorgan, Federal Reserve, SEIU, ACLU, etc would be prohibited from interfering in *any* way with the conduct of government, including lobbying. Corporate charters could henceforth be written to automatically dissolve a corporation when it became Too Big To Fail, for instance. If we put as much thought into the writing of corporate charters as we did in writing the Constitution, we wouldn't have any of the problems we have today. We could turn our attention to important issues like peak oil and over-population.

But it all starts with the simple act of restoring sovereignty to the US government. Having restored sovereignty to the US government it becomes a smaller struggle to restore sovereignty to The People that live here. The key, the linchpin, the tap root of corporate hegemony lies in its power to use the Constitution against us. Ask any prosecutor how hard it is to bring corporate criminals to justice. (I wish a state or federal prosecutor would stick their necks out and post on this forum; we need your input badly.)

OWS now has the world's attention. Our message will be known by all. The simpler we keep it the more likely the world will understand it. The more words we pile on that message, the harder it becomes to understand, the less likely the critical mass we need is going to get behind it.

Do FOX or MSNBC want to argue that corporations are people, too? They've shown a willingness to argue everything else, but even corporate shills know better than to argue that point. (Except Mitt, of course)

Electoral reform will be a natural by-product of de-personalization anyway; why push it now?

I’m disappointed with Cenk. He should know the ramifications of this. Dear Cenk: What about bundling? Don’t you know the Barack Obama Campaign is the King of Bundlers? This does nothing about bundling. www.occupy-delaware.com

This is a HUGE mistake! When you do this, you’ll be opening the biggest can of worms you’ll never survive. That Amend. will be fingerfucked to no end by both parties………..you’ll get an amendment you wish you never had! Political experience teaches us this.
www.occupationamerica.com
www.progressivepeoplepower.com

Look, there is no getting around it: We The People must form a Consensus Platform and run Consensus Candidates for office, to defeat the bi-partisan crimewave in Washington, a.k.a. Republicans and Democrats.

I believe we can do it. I believe we can overcome the adversity.

If you don't think that We The People can form a Consensus Platform and run Consensus candidates, then you have no lawful recourse against the bi-partisan crimewave in Washington. Go refresh the Liberty Tree if you believe our system is too broken to overcome the obstacles. I don't believe it is too broken to overcome the obstacles.

Mark my words, political experience teaches this is the only way to "Save America" from the bi-partisan crimewave in Washington who represents special interests and corporations over you and me.
ron@occupationamerica.com

Well, occupationamerica, we won't have to deal with the bought congresspeople in the national Congress because we plan to push this through using state legislatures. Although, this will be hard too. As soon as the major lobbiers of congress find out about this plan, I'm sure they'll lobby the fuck out of every state congressperson.

We should have a plan to deal with that too. The only reason congresspeople submit to the will of their donors is because they support their campaigns and help them get (re)elected. The only thing that has more influence than money are the votes themselves. We must pass on our message to as many people as possible and get them to vote against anyone who will not support this Convention.

And aren't people to contribute to bundlers as well as the bundler subject to present donation limits? If people pool their money into the bundler, under our 29th amendment, the bundler can only give about $116. Can you elaborate on the problem here?