Thanks, Jim, but no thanks…

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner says he recused himself from a vote because he owned some stock and thus had a conflict of interest…

By Jack E. Lohman

So he opted out of doing his job, but just this once.

The truth is, he and all congressmen almost always have a conflict, either through stock ownership or campaign fundraising. Perhaps they should all recuse themselves from everything. Or just stay home.

Then we’d not have a congress!!!   Wow. Wouldn’t that be nice?

But instead, they should just fix the system!

I prefer that they just require all congressmen to put their wealth in a blind trust. If they object make it a condition of being in congress. Require honesty.

And close the revolving door. For staff members too.

And stop the cash flow from the crooks at the top to my esteemed elected representative. My board of directors.

And here’s a way, Jim, bypassing the Supreme Court!

Indeed we should pass a Constitutional Amendment to reverse the Citizens United travesty. But it isn’t necessary to fix the campaign finance system!

A not-well-known clause of the Constitution (Article III) allows congress to set its own rules for salaries and campaign contributions, but no congressman wants to go there. They like the system broken, and like that they can blame the Supreme Court for their woes. And most political bribes filter down to the mainstream media, so don’t expect them to fight the corruption.

U.S. Constitution Article III, section 2, clause 2:

“In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”

It limits congressional election control to congress itself — and not the co-equal Supreme Court — and today’s congress has the power to ignore or reverse Citizen’s United and even the 1976 Buckley v. Veleo decision as it relates to congress taking cash bribes. That is, IF it wants to!!!

We have three co-equal branches of government, not one over the other!

The Court cannot control congress OR the executive branch. These co-equal branches can set their own rules of conduct.
See for more details.

Comments are closed.