Mitt Romney: Teachers Unions' Contributions To Political Campaigns Should Be Limited

I was listening to conservative talk radio about to go to bed when I heard them talk about a interview Romney gave and even the radio host was wondering how could say the things he said. Keep reading.

Mitt Romney embraced campaign finance reform on Tuesday. But rather than targeting unlimited corporate contributions or lending his support to existing campaign finance legislation, Romney instead suggested limiting teachers unions' donations to politicians.

"I don’t know that I would prevent teachers from being able to strike,” Romney said, acknowledging that "allowing to teachers to strike on matters such as compensation" is within their rights.

Instead, Romney said the focus should be on removing the teachers unions' money from the political equation.

“We simply can’t have a setup where the teachers unions can contribute tens of millions of dollars to the campaigns of politicians and then those politicians, when elected, stand across from them at the bargaining table, supposedly to represent the interests of the kids," Romney said. "I think it’s a mistake. I think we’ve got to get the money out of the teachers unions going into campaigns. It’s the wrong way for us to go. We’ve got to separate that.”

Romney also noted that the unions tend to be particularly friendly to Democratic candidates.

In my opinion this is about givingan advantage to the REpublican party.Democrats generaly do not have as many huge corperate donars Unions generally side with Democrats so this all about giving republicans an advantage. Can you guess what he thinks about limiting contributions from corporations? Keep reading if you do.

The former governor's comments fall in line with arguments made against the Supreme Court's controversial Citizens United decision, in which the court ruled that corporations and unions can spend unlimited amounts on campaigns under the First Amendment. Romney has previously declined to criticize the ruling, telling the Portsmouth Herald's editorial board that he believed "their decision was a correct decision."

So if money equals speech according to the supreme court Romney would like to silence the voice of teachers. Most of Romneys campaign has been financed by corporations and wealthy donors it seems he is all for their right to free speech and says nothing of limiting them. Everyone should be outraged by this. He has to be the most corperate loving politician I have ever seen. When he said corperations are people but has he forgoten people are people too?

You know how I feel about it but am I over reacting here. What do you think?

source

reply to post by Grimpachi


Wow, just.......wow. I can't think of anything else to say about that.

This really makes me mad. Has he forgoten teachers are people.

It makes me wonder if this guy is human.

He's lost it.

Seems we're getting these one of these "gaffes" every week.

Can't wait for the debates though, Romney is going to be embarrassed worse than a Republican congressman at a MENSA meeting.

If only he would have stated how many PAC'S are under his umbrella of Influence.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is how you throw a presidential election.


The GOP should at least make it look like they're trying

If this man gets in power and can change things the way he wants there won’t be any balance of power.

There will not be two parties just one. Change the rules where the Republicans will always win.

I can imagine America will be like one of those future sci-fi movies where corporations run everything.

An apocalyptic hell. Corporate police, prisons, army’s, government with logos, it is already heading that way but this could be the turning point.

Swap large corporate interests with teachers unions and he makes a valid point. Everyone knows what the real problem is, even if they refuse to acknowledge it.

reply to post by Grimpachi


He's correct, its a conflict of interest to have the unions paying off politicians who they later negotiate with.

The unions have been a big part of the problem with the education system. They protect bad teachers. They make it so teachers don't have to perform, but can retain their jobs. 20/20 did an excellent show on this very topic years back, and showed that the school system has teachers in it that are actually too dangerous to allow around the children, yet they cannot be fired. These teachers go to an empty building every day, and do nothing, while being paid by your tax dollars.

Here you go:

Some see a difference between large corporations and national level unions. That's nice, and I'll leave it to those folks in how they find a distinction. Personally I find the idea of Unions using their members paycheck withdrawn dues for political bribery as repugnant to the extreme.

I don't find it any better when KBR, Halliburton or an International Corporation does the same.

Either way, it's taking money from an enormous business structured organization and putting it to influencing politicians at a level so far beyond the concept of accountability to 'the people' that it's little more than a sick parody to suggest.

The problem here is... Free speech... (sigh) This rights business is a pain in the butt at times, but the alternative is no alternative at all....so I have to live with Unions and see Corporations as the balance to the system while the other side just has to live with Corporations while seeing nothing whatever wrong about Major Unions nearly owning national leaders.

The system at least has both extremes to balance each other......as much of a silver lining as that can be.

reply to post by defcon5


Hes correct.

I just find it hard to listen to him, even if he is within reason. I feel Our Country is lost with Obama, and lost with him also.But back on the subject. Teachers Unions are out of control. Look at these Chicago teachers, who didnt care if the Taxpayer had to foot the bill, and shall I say, held Chicago Hostage. Yes Out of Control. Can anyone say a Teachers Union has backed a Republican?

in less than 90 days this tool will fade into irrelevance where he belongs.

and we won't have to see that fake plastic tanned idiot sticking his foot in his mouth for the 300th time.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Wrabbit as usual you make sense and I appreciate your level headedness on this issue.

For me this upsets me more than anything I have heard from him before.

I wasn’t even insulted with the 47% comment because I know the man is out of touch and I don’t care what he thinks of me because I know I am not dependent on the government or ……. I will stop there or I will go on a rant.

What he is suggesting will throw the balance of power in one direction. I agree with you in most of what you said. But Romney has said so many things that when you add them all up does not paint a picture of a possible future that I want to see.

If I hadn’t have already made up my mind this would have done it. We definitely campaign finance reform but this is the worst idea I have ever heard. I am going to bed now.


With respect
Grim

All republicans do is disenfranchise and silence everyone that doesn't agree with them. They are the biggest threat to freedom in this country, especially the Tea Party.

reply to post by Grimpachi


Limited?? How about outright forbidden!

It angers me every time I see my property taxes paid. It pisses me off even more when I hear about teachers wanting to strike or how their union donates to so and so. It's not THEIR money.. it's OUR money. We work hard to pay those failtards and they turn around and throw our money at a political machine?

I see unions as a counterbalance to corporations. After all before there were unions there were corporations. If you wonder what life be like if they didn’t exist check your history books. Better yet look at china or just listen to the recording where Romney was describing the working conditions he saw while visiting a factory he was outsourcing jobs to. He sounded envious of how they could be taken advantage of.

What I would like to see contributions to campaigns. Neither corporations nor unions should be able to donate to politicians. People the living breathing kind should be the ones able to donate and put a cap on the amount otherwise 1 billionaire will donate 100 million and own the election. It was happened couple times already in this election. When someone donates that amount they own the politician they become a puppet.

However Romney would like to take away the teachers rights and do nothing about his puppet masters.

If you can’t see Romney is nothing but corporate puppet I feel sorry anyone who can't see that he will only improve the profits for the already rich while you starve to death waiting for their trickle down table scraps.

reply to post by Grimpachi

Corporations are already staving us out until they get their way. It makes no difference who the president is, that's just a sideshow to keep you thinking you have a choice in the matter. If the corporations wanted to the economy to turn around, it would have turned around already. Why would they want too? They are making record profits right now, and they can get darn near slave labor. Corporations who don't want to deal with unions simply move operations to “at will” states, or overseas. Anyone who thinks the president has any say in the job market needs to take the blinders off.

I wonder...has anyone ever considered a simple solution to this whole thing? Just turn the entire..and I mean 100% entire...funding of political campaigns to the public sector. As in, Government supplied funds and ONLY...NO EXCEPTIONS..ONLY...those funds used by the Candidates in any way or any direct form...in any imaginable concept. No loopholes.

Take the whole idea of campaign contributions out of the picture and do it entirely and forever. Period. Anyone can still do their private messaging and commercial running.. whatever... The campaigns and direct avenue of corruption to buy the current leaders would be a totally changed thing though and virtually overnight by that one change alone.

To anyone who says it's too expensive....take a glance at the Defense Budget as one of the best examples around of what Pork by the shipping container looks like. Political favors repaid with interest and then some to campaign contributors as much as ANY real demand or need for every program and idea. That costs *FAR* more than the billions (singular billions) all the funding would likely amount to.

I think the change in how Politician's thinking, loyalties and priorities would be defined by the nature of how the system would change....would be worth every penny.

Just my thought to wander back and share.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

All lobbying needs to be outlawed, but that will never happen. What us “little folks” want doesn’t matter anymore, only what the lobbyists want matters as they have the big bucks behind them. Since corporations WANT to be able to buy politicians, and they lobby to get what they want, we'll never be rid of that problem.

reply to post by defcon5


Romney’s plan will lead us to a Chinese Democracy where a balance will never be struck.

Giving in is not the answer. We have given trickle down over a decade to work and it failed we either need to return to common sense business practices or look to our neighbors for examples that work.