@rbreich

Instead, let's get rid of billionairism.

How about we make a PROGRESSIVE TAX on campaign contributions and lobbying?

Instead of calling this a restriction on speech, supporters can frame it as promoting democratic equality. The key arguments include:

Equal Protection: Every citizen should have equal influence in democracy, regardless of wealth. When rich people can "buy" more political influence, it violates this principle.
Anti-Corruption: Large donations create the appearance that politicians care more about big donors than regular voters. This damages trust in democracy.
Speech Still Protected: The tax doesn't ban anyone from donating or speaking about politics. It just makes large donations more expensive, similar to how we tax other activities that might harm society.

@rbreich
Whoever is posting this on this account:
If you're just posting stuff but never react you misunderstood this platform. It's not about numbers of followers to just publish anything to even more people.

THIS IS THE FEDIVERSE!

It is for communication. In BOTH directions that is, not as a one way street.
Btw. that includes people who need ALT Text to get your messages in the first place.

And yes we are *all* busy with our lifes too.
Stay safe! πŸ––

@rbreich

First we need a larger Supreme Court.

@kevinrns @rbreich No. We need term limits.

@mlanger @rbreich

No, the need is to appoint 8 more people to the Supreme Court.

Its been 6, 7, 8, 9,10, and FDR wanted 14. How many Justices there are isnt in the Constitution. Its set by Congress.

Corruption of the Courts is collapse.

@kevinrns @rbreich I don’t think MORE supreme court justices will make the matter any better if they are political appointees and can stay in their jobs until they literally drop dead.

@mlanger @rbreich

The problem in the court is not old men, the problem in the Court is corruption.

Four appointees LIED during Constitutionally Mandated Vetting, to Congress.

One other has received millions from billionaires. They conspired. Against us.

A corrupt conspiracy.

An ongoing corrupt conspiracy.

That's problem one.

#scotus #shame #vergogna

@kevinrns @rbreich I didn't say anything about age. Or gender. Or race.

I just said term limits. 12 years. It doesn't matter how old they are when they get in. Even corruption can be fought with term limits. 12 years and they're out.

I don't understand why you want to add more people to that body. If they're just as corrupt as the other ones, does it really matter?

@mlanger @rbreich

The body isnt corrupt, five people are.

Its billionaire corruption. Its anti democracy advocates.

Its a right wing distraction to respond to corruption and bad policy with pointless "term limits" its older than Nixon, and produced the present day GOP.

Term limits is a designed distraction.

@kevinrns @rbreich So you add 8 more people. And 20 years from now when 4 of them croak and another nut job is in the White House, we find ourselves in same situation. What then? Add another 8? When does it stop?

And don’t for a minute assume my β€œterm limits” argument is the result of a mindless right wing distraction. I’m DEEPLY OFFENDED that you should suggest such a thing. I’m done debating this with you now. You won’t listen to reason.

@mlanger @rbreich

Okey dokey. Its old republican Kant. Its tired, its a distraction, thanks for your thoughts.

@kevinrns @rbreich I’m NOT a Republican. I never have been and never will be. It just seems logical to me.

Thanks for your thoughts, too.

@kevinrns @mlanger @rbreich I honestly think it should be "one is chosen every four (or two) years, retirements are not replaced". It doesn't need to be a fixed number, and it doesn't have to be odd. Every POTUS term should get exactly the same number as every other POTUS term.

@AeonCypher @mlanger @rbreich

Tired nonsense. Appoint eight new, not corrupt, Justices, because FIVE of the Justices now ARE corrupt. Bribed or lied during vetting, both as arranged by billionaires, couping America.

I assume push back is bot republican, bot billionaire.

@kevinrns @mlanger @rbreich

I mean, go ahead and appoint five more now. I'm totally down with that. We need absolute Machivellianism right now.

Then, you also need a sustainable system after that.

You do not want to get into a game of tit-for-tat.

@AeonCypher @mlanger @rbreich

Getting rid of corruption is not Machiavellian. Its Anti-machiavellian.

I have no desire to be constrained by a two party system, which is also, not in the constitution.

Many states like Alaska and New York are breaking those chains.

@AeonCypher @mlanger @rbreich

Scotus Justices have numbered 6, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, and America's greatest President wanted 15. The number of Justices is not in the Constitution, it's set by Congress.

@rbreich and it never made a lick of sense. 180Β° from a govt of We the People
@rbreich
But how do we do this? Our system is so corrupt that we are now here. The Supreme Court is evil at this point in time. Since when are corporations people? It is all just so absurd. The only solution is public funding of elections. But I doubt that we can ever get there.

@rbreich

And the way we get rid of Citizens United, fossil fuels, etc is a general boycott. Only buying essentials until our demands are met. Sharing with people the boycott puts out of work the money that would have been spent needlessly.

@rbreich

#alt Your regular reminder that we desperately need to overturn Citizens United and get big money out of politics.

It is among the worst Supreme Court decisions in history. It corrupts our political system every day.