House Resolution 1 (HR 1): A comprehensive anti-corruption bill that'd go a long way towards fixing U.S. politics; discuss!

Would you pass House Resolution 1?

  • No; I disagree with all points listed

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    30

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
From an article from Vox, the details on House Resolution 1 are out, and it looks pretty fantastic; a veritable laundry list of things of things that would help add the kind of structure and regulation in politics that is currently missing in the United States' system. I encourage you all to go point-by-point and list what you like and don't like as much.

The bill covers three main planks: campaign finance reform, strengthening the government’s ethics laws, and expanding voting rights:
  1. Campaign Finance: Public financing of campaigns, powered by small donations. Under Sarbanes’s vision, the federal government would provide a voluntary 6-1 match for candidates for president and Congress, which means for every dollar a candidate raises from small donations, the federal government would match it six times over. The maximum small donation that could be matched would be capped at $200. “If you give $100 to a candidate that’s meeting those requirements, then that candidate would get another $600 coming in behind them,” Sarbanes told Vox this summer. “The evidence and the modeling is that most candidates can do as well or better in terms of the dollars they raise if they step into this new system.”
  2. Campaign Finance: Support for a constitutional amendment to end Citizens United.
  3. Campaign Finance: Passing the DISCLOSE Act, pushed by Rep. David Cicilline and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, both Democrats from Rhode Island. This would require Super PACs and “dark money” political organizations to make their donors public.
  4. Campaign Finance: Passing the Honest Ads Act, championed by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (MN) and Mark Warner (VA) and introduced by Rep. Derek Kilmer (D-WA) in the House, which would require Facebook and Twitter to disclose the source of money for political ads on their platforms and share how much money was spent.
  5. Campaign Finance: Disclosing any political spending by government contractors and slowing the flow of foreign money into the elections by targeting shell companies.
  6. Campaign Finance: Restructuring the Federal Election Commission to have five commissioners instead of the current four, in order to break political gridlock.
  7. Campaign Finance: Prohibiting any coordination between candidates and Super PACs.
  8. Ethics: Requiring the president and vice president to disclose 10 years of his or her tax returns. Candidates for president and vice president must also do the same.
  9. Ethics: Stopping members of Congress from using taxpayer money to settle sexual harassment or discrimination cases.
  10. Ethics: Giving the Office of Government Ethics the power to do more oversight and enforcement and put in stricter lobbying registration requirements. These include more oversight into foreign agents by the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
  11. Ethics: Creating a new ethical code for the US Supreme Court, ensuring all branches of government are impacted by the new law.
  12. Voting Rights: Creating new national automatic voter registration that asks voters to opt out, rather than opt in, ensuring more people will be signed up to vote. Early voting, same-day voter registration, and online voter registration would also be promoted.
  13. Voting Rights: Making Election Day a holiday for federal employees and encouraging private sector businesses to do the same, requiring poll workers to provide a week’s notice if poll sites are changed, and making colleges and universities a voter registration agency (in addition to the DMV, etc), among other updates.
  14. Voting Rights: Ending partisan gerrymandering in federal elections and prohibiting voter roll purging. The bill would stop the use of non-forwardable mail being used as a way to remove voters from rolls.
  15. Voting Rights: Beefing up elections security, including requiring the director of national intelligence to do regular checks on foreign threats.
  16. Voting Rights: Recruiting and training more poll workers ahead of the 2020 election to cut down on long lines at the polls.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,329
28,592
136
Democrats are just doing this as part of a long term ploy to get complete power and make everything not roses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nickqt

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Most of these look reasonable. I still dont understand the fascination of seeing tax returns though.
 

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
Ethics: Creating a new ethical code for the US Supreme Court, ensuring all branches of government are impacted by the new law.


What does this mean?

Overall sounds good to me. Biggest thing is getting money out of politics. No hidden ways to donate etc. I honestly don’t see why so much money is needed to campaign anyways.
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
9,210
6,809
136
Pretty much agree with all of it. Of course, Republicans will likely fight it to the death, since they know they'd lose every election if things were fair. At least, they would without having to seriously reform their policies.
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
9,210
6,809
136
Most of these look reasonable. I still dont understand the fascination of seeing tax returns though.

Trump is a textbook example of why you need to see tax returns: because they can reveal shady behavior or catch people out in lies. It's generally believed that Trump isn't as rich as he wants to convey, and there's a chance that his returns could reveal a heavy dependence on Russia or some "creative accounting."
 

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,027
2,595
136
Most of these look reasonable. I still dont understand the fascination of seeing tax returns though.
It's something in the past was a non issue (and generally something given freely by the candidates) but with trump there now needs to be a law. It's basically trump ruining things for all other future candidates
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Most of these look reasonable. I still dont understand the fascination of seeing tax returns though.
Because one of the President's powers is awarding government contracts, and the American People have the right to know if the President is personally benefiting from those contracts (ie is awarding contracts to companies that he has an ownership interest in).

Also, the Constitution specifically forbids the President from doing any business whatsoever with foreign entities while in office (emoluments clause), and there is a 100% chance that this President in is violation of that.
 
Last edited:

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
9,938
6,530
136
LOL most of us think its a good idea. Privately Trump fluffers are thinking this is an assault on their rights to betray the country.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Trump is a textbook example of why you need to see tax returns: because they can reveal shady behavior or catch people out in lies. It's generally believed that Trump isn't as rich as he wants to convey, and there's a chance that his returns could reveal a heavy dependence on Russia or some "creative accounting."

As much as Trump has been audited, do you honestly think the IRS wouldnt have found anything illegal by now? Seriously?
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,378
5,122
136
Trump is a textbook example of why you need to see tax returns: because they can reveal shady behavior or catch people out in lies. It's generally believed that Trump isn't as rich as he wants to convey, and there's a chance that his returns could reveal a heavy dependence on Russia or some "creative accounting."
Everyone seems to forget that the IRS has those returns. If they contained evidence of criminal activity or cheating they would pursue him. It's also almost certain that his taxes were done by a team of CPA's, and it's unlikely they would risk prison to cover up Trumps ill gotten gains.
While the instructions on a 1040 say to include income from criminal activity's, almost no one does it.
The only thing that might show up is huge sums of money for consulting or speaking engagements, that's where you can hide money from bribes and influence peddling.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
What does this mean?

Overall sounds good to me. Biggest thing is getting money out of politics. No hidden ways to donate etc. I honestly don’t see why so much money is needed to campaign anyways.
Supreme Court justices are not adequately covered by ethics laws and thus could be making decisions that they personally benefit from financially.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
I think disclosing them is a good thing, has to go back far though (decade sounds good) and spouses have to be included. It’s not some silver bullet or anything but I have no issue requiring of candidates. Not just presidential but Congress critters and SC justices also.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
As much as Trump has been audited, do you honestly think the IRS wouldnt have found anything illegal by now? Seriously?
Illegal to the IRS is when a taxpayer doesn't disclose all of their taxable income.
Illegal for a public official is when they make decisions with the public's money that benefit them personally and without disclosing that conflict of interest.
Do you understand how those 2 things are different?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
As much as Trump has been audited, do you honestly think the IRS wouldnt have found anything illegal by now? Seriously?


I don’t think it’s a matter of being illegal (although I’m sure many on here believe that), but just a matter of knowing who’s paying our candidates. That they report anyways.

One not mentioned that I think important and in the same area is no candidates should have a foundation or charity.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Everyone seems to forget that the IRS has those returns. If they contained evidence of criminal activity or cheating they would pursue him. It's also almost certain that his taxes were done by a team of CPA's, and it's unlikely they would risk prison to cover up Trumps ill gotten gains.
While the instructions on a 1040 say to include income from criminal activity's, almost no one does it.
The only thing that might show up is huge sums of money for consulting or speaking engagements, that's where you can hide money from bribes and influence peddling.
The IRS' scope does not include the investigation of criminal activity outside of the tax laws.
Also, corruption for a public official does not require that the funds be from actual criminal activity.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Illegal to the IRS is when a taxpayer doesn't disclose all of their taxable income.
Illegal for a public official is when they make decisions with the public's money that benefit them personally and without disclosing that conflict of interest.
Do you understand how those 2 things are different?

I do. And there is still a case against Trump regarding violation of the emoluments clause, so we'll see where that goes.

Oh and the IRS does much more than look for undisclosed income.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
It's something in the past was a non issue (and generally something given freely by the candidates) but with trump there now needs to be a law. It's basically trump ruining things for all other future candidates

It's not just Trump. Romney didn't reveal his tax return for the year the IRS gave amnesty to well heeled tax cheats over Swiss accounts, for example.

OTOH, Crooked Hillary provided returns going back forever, revealing that they paid ~30% in federal taxes & gave another 10% to charity. Must be one of Obama's voodoo Kenyan mind tricks or something, huh?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I do. And there is still a case against Trump regarding violation of the emoluments clause, so we'll see where that goes.

Oh and the IRS does much more than look for undisclosed income.

The GOP has been kicking the IRS in the nuts since 2011 on behalf of their rich benefactors-

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/10/irs-the-gop-propublica-budget-cuts-enforcement-billions.html

Only the very rich can afford to create the kind of complex financial structures that defy analysis by the IRS. Like Enron, only better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
9,938
6,530
136
As much as Trump has been audited, do you honestly think the IRS wouldnt have found anything illegal by now? Seriously?

Well they are told by the people in power to ignore massive fraud and go after the small fish.

There is a reason Bernie Madoff's scam existed for as long as it did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie