Home

Blog

H.R. 359, To reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating taxpayer financing of presidential election campaigns and party conventions

Comparing revision saved on January 21, 2011, 06:30:24 (webmaster), with revision saved on March 2, 2011, 06:33:02 (webmaster):

H.R. 359 would reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating taxpayer financing of presidential election campaigns and party conventions.

== Detailed Summary ==

<summary>
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)
</summary>

<!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->

== Status of the Legislation ==

<status>
Latest Major Action: 1/20/2011: Referred to House committee.3/1/2011: Senate floor actions. Status: Referred toCloture motion on the Committee on Ways and Means, and in additionmotion to proceed to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determinedbill withdrawn by the Speaker,unanimous consent in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.Senate.
</status>

<!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->

== Points in Favor ==

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->

== Points Against ==

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->

« Return to Revision History.

Learn More

    Saves: $5.07 per
    and decreases their $162,301.27 share of the national debt by $5.07.
    (source info)

  • Read the Bill
  • Read an Analysis of the Bill
  • See What People Are Saying

To What Committees was this Bill Referred?

From the Blog

WashingtonWatch.com Digest – January 24, 2011

This is the WashingtonWatch.com email newsletter for the week of January 24, 2011. Subscribe here. email newsletter | tell a friend | wiki | about | home | log in On the Blog: State of the Union Week With President Obama’s state of t...

WashingtonWatch.com Digest – January 31, 2011

This is the WashingtonWatch.com email newsletter for the week of January 31, 2011. Subscribe here. email newsletter | tell a friend | wiki | about | home | log in The Blog: Earmarks—Gone for Good? In his “State of the Union” sp....

Visitor Comments Comments Feed for This Bill

Kachina

January 24, 2011, 10:11am (report abuse)

Does it matter what, We The People, want or need, anymore?

Archie Haase

January 24, 2011, 10:13am (report abuse)

I am thinking this would rationalize Americans giving up sovereignty? If this means global corporation would now control the US congress and White House. Wrong wrong wrong, and un American! We would be ran by a noble class of corporate big wigs.

@Archie Haase

January 24, 2011, 10:50am (report abuse)

Not a clue what you were trying to say. Seems like the first part of your post "I am thinking" is contradicted by the rest of your babble.

LucasFoxx

(logged-in user) January 24, 2011, 8:40pm (report abuse)

This is a bad sign.

John in Texas

January 24, 2011, 11:27pm (report abuse)

I'm for anything that reduces the demand for our taxes. Only question I have is how much is being saved by doing this?

Not a

January 25, 2011, 12:09am (report abuse)

dime would be saved in the end. The politicians will get their money from somewhere. If it comes from business people you can bet we will end up paying for it in higher costs. At least this way someone is counting the money.

Whose Idea was This?

January 25, 2011, 11:41am (report abuse)

A narrow-minded bill that would save money--per the CBO--by carving away at democracy. The trend s/b towards reducing campaign expenditures and the role of special interest dollars, not magnifying them.

I wish it

January 26, 2011, 12:18am (report abuse)

was my idea. I'm happy to see this kind of action being considered.

Archie Haase

January 31, 2011, 11:48am (report abuse)

Back@YOU!!!! For example --- You want those that that were bribed and cheated --- called campaign contributions) running things?

An example. Giving private insurers the right to control medical costs by writing legislation and setting premiums is to me ---- is giving up sovereignty! With your plan it will all be about rich folks, or bought off folks, financed by what I call bribes you call campaign contributions running our nation!

What have you folks been smoking? Is it part of the republican mindset or those that stole the republican party plan to turn the US into a third rate developing country?

I am happy with this new Republican congress. Let us see where this congress takes the dialogue and the US?

Archie Haase

January 31, 2011, 12:42pm (report abuse)

What the Republicans tell the American people is do not let government control them. They are right!

The Republicans tell Americans they lose sovereignty if the government takes total of the American's life, and daily business.

However sovereignty is also lost if corporations running congress through campaign contribution I call bribery take control of the American and his daily life.

The result is the same. Main street America loses both ways.

Mike C

January 31, 2011, 1:48pm (report abuse)

I think this is a rediculouse idea. While on the surface it seems as though this may be a good plan, I believe it perpetuates the propblems with polotics. Real election finance refore would include zero prive money leavinging it 100% publicly funded with each party getting an eqaul share of the funds and equal time on OUR airwaives... why should only rich people have a chance to run?

@Mike C

January 31, 2011, 5:18pm (report abuse)

In your case, it appears the problem with politics is that you are able to vote. An uneducated person, as you appear to be, cannot make sound decisions at the polling place.

L

February 3, 2011, 12:33pm (report abuse)

Another meaningless Republican attempt to limit who can participate in the political realm to rich plutocrats only.

TMLutas

February 4, 2011, 7:03am (report abuse)

Anybody notice that the current system has led to a legislature dominated by the well off already? Those attacking this legislation need to take a good look at what the current system has already done. Public finance is a sad joke. I'd rather have 100% private finance and real time notification and quick penalties for dirty tricks like turning off credit card verification so you can't tell if donations are coming from foreigners over the Internet.

M

April 30, 2011, 5:50pm (report abuse)

Dont blame the coorporations, Blame your elected officials. They're the ones accepting the money! You elected greedy mofo's that do anything to keep their job.

RSS Feeds for This Bill

Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)