1. u can only donate to people u can vote for
2. no pac’s, corporate, lobbyist, or foreign donations
3. must be us citizen to vote
4. unlimited donations but public list of the donors and how much they have given
5. 6 month campaign cycle
6. no matching federal funds
7. no donations to political parties, the politicians can give a part of there raised funds to their own parties ( cause you cant vote for parties, but for people.)

DUMP THE DEMOCRATS!
UNITE INTO A NEW PARTY NOW!

We the people, opposed to the destruction of the planet and it’s peoples, now atomized and powerless in “grass roots” and “special interest” groups, must unite our efforts and resources into a new party to replace the corrupt Democratic Party! A new party that rejects corporate funding in order to end the corporate plunder of the federal government.

A new party explicitly opposed to the Project for the New American Century. Opposed to unending war for profit and power. Cut the military budget by 50%, shut down the 700 military bases around the world. Re-instate taxes cut by Bush gang.

A new party that commits the entire resources of the country to end global warming, end imperialist wars, implements true non-profit universal health care. promotes mass transportation, develops renewable energy, and produces the essentials for human survival.

A new party that promotes an economy that works towards fulfilling the economic needs of all the people, not just to profit a tiny minority of super wealthy. No more people living on the streets! No more hospitalized people being dumped into the streets when they have no money or health insurance! (See the film SICKO)

A new party to unite all of the oppressed people of this country. A new party that cuts across all the false social and cultural divisions that keep us forever powerless (racial, ethnic, age, language, etc.). A new party to unite us against the unending destruction of peoples and planet.

A SOCIALIST PARTY to promote the end of gangster capitalism, run-amok capitalism, which is supported by both Democratic and Republican parties.

A new party to support the labor movement and all working people. We urge the labor movement to stop supporting the Democratic Party (already besotted by corporate money), and to focus its precious resources to fund a new national radio and television network. By being on the air 24 hours a day the labor movement can provide the latest news, information, education and current affairs analysis desperately needed by all working people. This effort, combined with the formation of the new party, will be a bold step towards reviving the organized labor movement.

For years we have listened to radio programs like DEMOCRACY NOW! that has discussed with numerous “grass roots” groups desperately struggling to make a positive change in society. Anti-war protest groups, civil rights groups, union struggles, affordable housing groups, teachers unions, health care access, seniors about Social Security, have involved millions of people. Now is the time to unite the energy and resources of the people into a new party.

The new party provides a means of uniting the “special interest” agendas of each group into the platform of the new party. The new party candidates, selected from the various individuals and groups, would become the candidates representing their cause and the new party. The new party will contest for office at every level of government in order to take power. The new party will provide the new leadership and new programs this country desperately needs.

There is still time before November 2008 elections to start this process. Even the announcement and preparation for a founding convention of such a new party will shock both Democrats and Republican incumbents. They will know that their days are numbered!

The needs of all previous “minority” and “special interests” people now become the platform of the new party representing the vast majority of people. Can the existing activists of so-called “minority” and “special interest” groups overcome their existing powerlessness, and link up with each other to start this new party?

This all-inclusive struggle will attract millions of atomized working people, often non-voters and uninvolved people, who have been atomized, exploited, brain-washed by corporate media and ultimately destroyed by gangster capitalism.

As for the social safety net, no sane libertarian is calling for its immediate repeal. The best plan–and what Paul apparently supports (http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2005/tst012405.htm) is to allow people to opt out of Social Security if they please. That leaves the so-called “safety net” intact for those that need it, and frees everyone else to invest their money as they see fit.

Anyway, I am reading Howard Zinn’s Peoples’ History of the United States 1492 – Present, and I have to say, while I think stripping corporations of personhood would be a bare beginning, the problems with this country go so much deeper than that. The founders and colonists of this country called themselves living Christian lives while they killed and enslaved. The first three chapters of Howard Zinn’s book are amazing in giving a frame of reference for us to understand the bind we find ourselves in, as a ‘nation’ today. We have all been played like cheap violins since forever and another way to appeal to every class of citizen is to use the ploys of the founding fathers, who were a group of rich men trying to establish their own status quo over England’s. They used the idea of Nation, and tricked people into believing that ‘national interests’ existed, as opposed to their own agenda. So why not take it back now? Unwinnable, endless wars waged against ideologies, why not flip the script? Using religion is too scary, too many variables.
If you haven’t already, please check out Howard Zinn’s book. It’s like a natural precursor to your article, and the most concise explanation of the nature of our nation I have seen so far.

Hell, I’m always arguing with myself. You raise a good point,though. If the second party hopes to generate cross-over support, we will take in some unsvory types. I believe it was FDR who said, “They may be bastards, but they’re our bastards.”

My biggest issue with the Libertarian Party is that in advocating shrinking government, they fail to realize that if we are to restore our democratic freedom, we must reduce the size of our corporations as well. Free market ideology is choking us. I admit that I am not as well read on the Libertarian platform as I should be, so feel free to correct me.

Anon.

One of the keys of public financing of elections is the requirement that the FCC offer free airtime. This would greatly reduce campaign expenses. Who would be included or excluded would depend upon how the law was written. You are correct in saying that it is possible fringe candidates would be excluded, but they are certainly excluded under the present system.

I don’t agree with your interpretation of the social safety net and the Constitution. The concept of a social safety net is embedded in our Declaration of Independence. When Jefferson spoke of the “pursuit of happiness,” he wasn’t refering to pathological consumerism. He used the work in the eighteenth century sense of the common welfare, or common weal as it was called. It meant that no community could be happy as long as one of its members was in want of life’s necessities.

I would also draw your attention to Article IX of the Bill of Rights which states, “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Food, shelter and clothing are certainly basic rights to which all are entitled.

Thank you for your stimulating comments.

Much of what you have to say is in Ron Paul’s platform already. Freedom might well benefit some racists, but only because it benefits everyone. I’m OK with that. The social safety net is unconstitutional at the federal level, plain and simple. Either change the Constitution, or stick to it as it is. Ignoring it is what got us where we are in the first place.

I do disagree with your statements about Ron Paul. And quite frankly, I don’t care who else supports him. I support his ideas. And from your very own logic, where you state we need someone to appeal to all from redneck to hippie to hiphop, but on the other side argue that he may have supporters that you don’t like (which I have yet to see any evidence to support that claim) so you won’t support him. Odd mix of logic.

If anyone is allowed to speak long enough they will eventually start arguing with themselves though so I won’t hold that against you.

Ron Paul embodies much, if not all of what you believe should be, so how about helping us pitch BB’s faster… :)