Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Proposed Talking Points for OccupyWallStreet



After dropping by the Occupy Seattle non-camp ground yesterday I realized that the time has really come to begin coalescing this movement around a few basic efforts that more than the fringe can identify with.  I mean really, there might have been 100 people there, and they were all younger than 30, full of tats and dreds.  Not a middle class person amongst them.  The movement clearly needs a more inclusive theme other than nuke the banks or kill the capitalists.


This made me start thinking about what the theme might be, and today I had a great cab ride from my Client to SEATAC here in the People's republic of NorthWestia that really helped clarify my thoughts for what the talking points for the OWS movement should be.  I owe a debt of gratitude to my cabbie, an elderly gent from East Africa who spoke little English, but actively commented and drove home the points that I've been trying to clarify in my head for months now.


The conservative media has dehumanized and vilified them; most central in their message is that this is a rag tag group of discontents who have no platform to promote.  They acquaint OWS with the masked anarchists who have shown up at so many other anti-establishment protests.  And somehow they miss the point.


OWS today is an exciting example of Democracy in action.  It's gritty, unorganized.  A group of people with an enormous set of issues looking for a common direction that they can mobilize both themselves as well as a sizable chunk of the US around to make what they hope is real change.


Central to their complaints, I'll say central to OUR complaints are two themes that, if addressed would enable a democratic process to emerge in this great nation to address all the others.  I propose these as starting points to productively resolve our issues.  I think they'll both take Constitutional Amendments, but  with the power of social media and the internet certainly we can get sufficient energy around these to get them passed:


ISSUE ONE: CORRUPTION


Our current governmental system is corrupt and no longer can claim to legitimately represent us.  Our representatives are bought and paid for by wealthy individuals and corporations who, through campaign contributions buy access and action.  It's pure pay for play driven by greed, and the need to compete in dollars with other candidates.  At what point did we agree to let a dollar represent one's worth in society?  


PROPOSAL


Contributions to elected officials or candidates for public offices shall be limited to no more than one day's average wages for the bottom 20% of Americans.  It shall be a felony to give more than this amount to any elected official or candidate.  It shall be a felony to receive more than this.


PACS and other aggregators of funding shall be illegal and disbanded.  It shall be a felony to establish one, a felony to contribute to one.


ISSUE TWO:  PERSONHOOD


Last I checked our Constitution read "We the People of the United States" not "We the Businesses of the United States."  Corporations are not people, no matter what tortured legal thinking you apply to the issue.  


PROPOSAL


Corporations do not have the legal rights of persons.  Therefore they shall not be permitted to contribute or give money to any elected official or candidate for office.  A corporation found to be doing so shall have its license to do business in the jurisdiction the offense occurred REVOKED.  (If found giving money to a state official or candidate they shall be forbidden to do business in that state, if found giving money to a US Governmental official or candidate they shall have their right to do business in the US REVOKED.




By doing these two things we can take the money and power out of politics, and reintroduce a democratic process in our great nation.  We once more can have real elected representatives, not the charade of options presented by the two equally corrupt parties today.  Once we've done this we can address all the other issues the way a democracy is supposed to - by open dialog and debate.  It will be messy.  It will be contentious.  But at least it will happen, rather than being shoveled under the carpet the way it is today.


No comments:

Post a Comment