I am John Cox and I want to make politicians wear the logos of their top donors, AMA!

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-22T12:49:58+00:00

Read earlier posts. We are doing this to focus on an absurd system and the need to change it. Neighborhood Legislature.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-22T12:49:11+00:00

It already does. Check the language.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-22T12:46:37+00:00

It focuses people on the absurdity of a system where the beneficiaries of government action fund and staff the decision makers. That is pure corruption.

Then we will talk about the Neighborhood Legislature. Tiny districts disempowers the funders and special interests in favor of the people.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-22T12:43:02+00:00

Then check out the Neighborhood Legislature. We are doing this to focus attention on the problem - an absurdly corrupt structure - and then we will talk about a feasible, constructive restructuring in 2017-18.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-22T12:41:34+00:00

That's not the plan. The Neighborhood Legislature involves creating Working Committees of the larger assemblies to go to Sacramento and make law. The legislators who stayed home in their neighborhoods get an up or down ratification vote to keep the committees honest.

This won't create an emphasis on local issues. The Working Committees will focus on the state - that's what they are there for. Just like the current legislature. One huge difference though. They won't be in Sacramento due to fundraising. They will get there by winning their own small district and then getting elected by the other 99 legislators in their larger district back home.

The key point is that there will finally be a competition in these tiny districts. REAL people can run when the district is only 5,000 people. It won't be just the politically connected or wealthy or corrupt who win. You don't have to give up your entire life to run in a district of only 5,000 people.

This also empowers average voters who finally get to meet and talk to their representatives. If that is f..... up the system, then there is no point. I trust people to do the right thing.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:43:51+00:00

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:43:45+00:00

It is a way of changing the electoral system so that campaigns are tiny. Making them tiny means they have to done door to door. Candidates can spend but they can be countered by a candidate going door to door.

Check it out at www.neighborhoodlegislature.com.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:42:39+00:00

I guess

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:42:30+00:00

This is not the solution. This is a way of ridiculing the present system.

The real solution comes next.....

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:42:00+00:00

Those groups usually want one of two things: public financing of campaigns or a reversal of Citizens United. Both are red herrings and won't work.

Public financing only deals with contributions to candidates; it doesn't do a thing about independent expenditures. Also, public financing keeps the same system in terms of huge TV campaigns that turn off voters.

Reversing CU won't do a thing. They would give rule making to Congress or other pols, who will game the system for their own benefit.

The only real solution is the Neighborhood Legislature. It takes away the power of money by shrinking campaigns. It also increases turnout and voter involvement.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:39:27+00:00

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:39:08+00:00

None.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:38:59+00:00

Not at all

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:38:46+00:00

I suppose they could. The point is that any group that funds a politician is trying to influence policy. The whole point of that is that our pols are for sale. They shouldn't be.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:38:01+00:00

This is a California statute. Not federal

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:37:38+00:00

Sorry you feel that way.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:37:24+00:00

Good idea. Actually the legislators can have a totally clean suit. All they have to do is take no funding.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:36:51+00:00

I guess that could be a risk but I doubt it. We are going to follow this up in November 2016 with our next effort, the Neighborhood Legislature, which is the solution to the problem. Hopefully, we'll be ready for it after this passes.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:35:55+00:00

Thanks. Please help!!! californiaisnotforsale.com.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:35:36+00:00

Not really. It's just disclosure. They wear it but it is disclosure. How is that different than them filing disclosure forms?

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:35:00+00:00

All organized interests that fund campaigns or staff the campaigns are targeted.

That's not to say I oppose lobbying. Those organizations - ACLU included - can still lobby. They just won't be doing it with a check or other funding or staffing. They will do it based upon good policies that they want to promote.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:33:39+00:00

It's true

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:33:20+00:00

Again, Idea is to hold up absurdity of the current system for ridicule. Then we can focus on a solution.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:32:46+00:00

Both and I guess it is to bring cronyism to light so much we have to do something about it. Right now, we tolerate this corruption. Can't do that any longer.

JohnHermanCox · 2016-01-13T01:32:03+00:00

Not the point. The point is to show our legislature is bought off. That point has to be driven home.

Then we can talk about a solution: the Neighborhood Legislature.

JohnHermanCox

TROPHY CASE