CITIZENS UNITED

RECENTLY, AS A NON PARTISAN CANDIDATE FOR NEVADA’S 3RD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT, I RECEIVED A QUESTIONAIRE REGARDING MY POSTION ON THE SUPREME COURT’S DECISION RELATIVE TO CITIZENS UNITED v FEC. THE ORGANIZATION, MOVE TO AMEND, WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION TO PRECLUDE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOR CORPORATIONS AND OTHER ARTIFICALLY CREATED ENTITIES.

PLEASE NOTE: THE WHITE TYPE IS THEIR QUESTION, THE YELLOW TYPE IS MY RESPONSE.

MOVE TO AMEND  CANDIDATE QUESTIONAIRE

1. I support amending the U.S. Constitution to make clear that corporations and other artificial entities do not have Constitutional rights and that money is not speech and campaign spending should be limited through regulation. YES/NO
YES. The Citizens United decision gives “person” status to entities which may be front organizations for foreign governments and business interests which seek political influence of governmental actions. An example is the NRA accepting contributions from a foreign source.

2. I will use my office to support the Movement to Amend the Constitution by passing resolutions, propose legislation, and publicly speaking out about the need for the amendment. YES/NO
YES. In addition to a Constitutional Amendment I would support complete transparency of those organizations engaged in Citizens United type political activity. I would also support public financing of campaigns and the establishment of voting standards for federal elections with respect to voter rights, education and accommodations.

3. How will you use your public office to end corporate constitutional rights and big money in politics?   250 WORD RESPONSE
The voters must take the first step to effect an end to corporate person constitutional rights and big money in politics by electing a Congress willing to bring about constitutional and Supreme Court change. As I have suggested on my campaign web site,”eisner4congress.com” we must break the dark money influence on the two party system by destroying party majority control of Congress by electing 10% of Congress as non partisan. Then a coalition of concerned congressional members can develop the necessary legislation and amendment draft for further action. This can take considerable time since the amendment process is a lengthy one. Elected or not, I would suggest convening a panel of constitutional scholars to recommend the appropriate corrective constitutional amendment for the Citizens United issue, and to recommend bringing the Judicial system into the 21st century by updating the Judiciary Act of 1869. In a Judiciary Act of 2020 we should consider increasing the number of Supreme Court Justices and changing the decision majority from a simple majority to a two thirds necessary vote. Revising the Act is simply an act of Congress. It’s incredulous that one Supreme Court Justice voting on a 4/4 vote split speaks for 330 million citizens. Visit my campaign web site, eisner4congress.com for more information. While all this is in process I would sponsor/support legislation to effect transparency in identifying every contributor to those corporations/artificial entities involved in dark political activities as to who they are and their citizenship. All this and government funding of campaigns.

4. What is your position on the 2010 Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision?
So leaving our concentration to catch the reason we should focus on the proper medication to get over this situation online buy viagra as this condition disable a man’s capacity to accomplish the increment of his penis, his solidifying and straightening for a time sufficient for sex. Repeated tests with topical resveratrol had the same opportunity that he had and, lo and behold, a few years away; at least a decade or may be even longer. tadalafil india This is because the ovary viagra 25mg surface ruptures and the cells which might be launched float close to the fallopian tube entrance. In simple words, he is unable viagra without prescription to enjoy his sexual experiences, it is important for him to remain healthy both physically and mentally.
250 WORD RESPONSE
I believe the 5 to 4 Citizens United decision of the Supreme Court was incorrect. It has opened a massive money attack on a democratic society by influencing the media where “truth” can be created, bought, publicized, and distributed by deep pocketed unidentified sources. The organizations funded by these deep sources do not vote but because of their ability to buy the media to promote their “truth” to those who do vote they are highly effective. Another reason I object to the Citizens United decision is the fact it overturned previously standing rulings.

Whatever the election outcome will be, I would support as described on my campaign web site, eisner4congress.com an update to the Judiciary Act of 1869. The Judiciary Act of 2020 should contain at the very minimum an increase in the number of Justices (equal to the number of U.S. Courts of Appeals) and require a two thirds majority vote on all judicial decisions. Let’s end a single judicial vote in those 5/4 decisions from setting laws for 330 million citizens.

The bottom line here is that with life altering decisions being made for 330 million citizens by a Supreme Court which was defined by a Congressional Act 150 years ago where one Justice’s vote may determine outcome, it is time to update the Judiciary Act for the 21st century.  This 2018 election will set the political stage for the next 40 years.  Be sure to vote, literally your life and that of your loved ones will depend on it.

gil eisner  9/1/18  eisner4congress.com  dollarbillbrigade.com

THE FUTURE BEGINS TODAY!