Overturn the "citizen's united" ruling by te supreme court allowing unlimited corporate funding to influence elections and legislation.

Republicans Mark Folay and Will Cain spoke on the Bill Mahr Show recently along with Bill McKibbin, environmentalist, about what to do about global warming. Bill McKibbin pointed to scientists' conclusions about the changes that have begun to happen and will escalate if we continue to use fossil fuels at the rate we currently do. He was in favor of adjusting our use of fossil fuels. But the Republicans supported the US Chamber of Commerce's point of view that there is no need to adjust our use of fossil fuel use because the human physiology will adjust to the new conditions on earth when it needs to. I'd like these two Republicans to come back on the show with a statement from the Chamber of Commerce to explain why they feel that it is better to rely on their prediction that the human physiology will adjust to decreased oxygen in the atmosphere, the disappearance of clean water and air, reduced ability to grow crops in the earth, increased hurricanes, tornadoes, draughts, high temperatures, extreme weather conditions in all seasons, and so on. Who does it benefit to wait for the human physiology to adjust to these changes, evidently through a survival of the fittest process? Why do they prefer to hasten these changes, and their predicted physiological adjustment of the human species? Why is this better than adjusting use of fossil fuels? What's the preference based on?

We petition Congress to pass an act to permanently protect all private retirement accounts from being "raided" by an employee's company. This act would make an employee's retirement account the exclusive property of the employee. Retirement benefits are COMPENSATION FOR WORK PERFORMED. As such they absolutely must be protected by Federal statute from any and all corporate/company diversion from the original retirement fund purpose. We now have a Federal agency (that is broke) which pays some retirement to retired employees of businesses that have wiped out the employees' retirement funds. This fund should NOT be use to bail out irresponsible companies with taxpayer money. It would be unnecessary if we had proper legislation to protect employee retirement accounts.

Sheldon Adelson has contributed millions of dollars to super pacs that support Mitt Romney and Republicans. Any investigation by either candidate should be conducted by an independent prosecutor to avoid the appearance of returning a favor or getting revenge.

A Friend and neighborhood activist is being foreclosed. He built the house with his own hands but will be on the street in 10 days if someone buys it at auction in 9 days, October 26. His many communications with the mortgage holders, who, it seems, are not the actual mortgage holders, have yielded no action nor have they even been acknowledged. Governor Gregoire, this is urgent. Will you, or the person you designate appropriate, order an emergency halt to foreclosures in Washington State until all situations are properly reviewed and especially, discussed with the homeowner? An excerpt from his letter is below: "On the 16th of August, 2012 the Washington State Supreme Court ruled unanimously that certain foreclosure activities in which MERS does not hold the promissory note is not a lawful beneficiary. Consequently, an unlawful beneficiary could not proceed with a foreclosure.It is my understanding that by law a trustee is a neutral party. And yet every action Regional Trustee has taken thus far has been bank driven and bank represented (perhaps even bank financed?). Why has there been no effort by the trustee to hear my side of the story? Please explain, so that i may understand. I have been told (and this is clearly documented in the public records of my home) that HSBC is not the holder of my note, nor is MERS, both of whom are listed as the only beneficiaries on my foreclosure notice.I ask Regional Trustee to do the same, to step toward the side of justice, of people, of Humanity and cancel this auction, at least until HSBC cleans up its own house before it steals others, at least until my concerns stated herein are fully addressed, and certainly until the true owners of my mortgage step out of hiding and justify their actions."

Stop buying from major corportations untill they bring jobs back to america

This matter concerns the massive underreporting of lobbying by the American Legislative Exchange Council ("ALEC"). While ostensibly a nonprofit organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, ALEC's primary purpose is to provide a vehicle for its corporate members to lobby state legislators and to deduct the costs of such efforts as charitable contributions. ALEC drafts "model" legislation provided by its corporate and legislative members, and lobbies for the adoption of that legislation. These goals are fundamentally inconsistent with ALEC's claimed tax-exempt status as a charitable organization under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3), because (i) "no substantial part" of a charity's activity can be "attempting to influence legislation," and (ii) ALEC's activities do not qualify under any of the enumerated purposes of Section 501(c)(3).

In my 50 years in industry in US & UK & Canada as a consultant , employee and company director in more than 17 companies been acquired or the acquiring companies. I have benefited from only one of the companies in which I was the co-founder. The verbage used has been LBO's, Leverage Buy Outs, M&A's, etc., etc. The bottom line the actual individual leaders who manage these make the least amount of their personal money in the " acquisition of the other company who may or may not be a profitable company. They " leverage" the assets of the acquired company to borrow money. or use shares of the new ABC company to pay for the transaction. They than sell the physical assets in the balance sheet which may consist of buildings, divisions, or plant & machinary. They than " trim" the work force, reduce salary & benefits , rewarding just a few of the senior employees who they use to carry out their decisions. Then within 2 to 7 years dress up the balance sheet and the new facade of the company and sell it to the highest bidder. In the meantime the Directors of the Equity capital company collect substantial fees and expenses in lieu of salary plus stock options. They then share with the actual investor or the lending institutions who provided the funds and/or loans to buy the company.

The Koch Bros. have bullied their employees to vote for Romney or possibly lose their jobs. They are not only financing Romney's candidacy, they also are trying to rigg votes. Americans like you and me should not have to worry that money will trump democracy.

Billionaires and owners of corporations have spent millions of dollars in PAC money to effect the outcome of the election. With the possibility of losing, they have now resorted to threat and intimidation to their workers.

Write the 28th Amendment to the US Constitution that will take the Country back from billionaires, corporate and union organizations who buy their way to rule their special interest

As a former broadcaster, I have felt for some time there is a need to restore the "public" in the public airwaves. It began in 1996 when the Communications Act of 96 went into law. It was sold to the American people as a necessity for the broadcasters, but a bad deal for the public. At present, the law stipulates that a media company can have unlimited ownership of broadcast properties in a single market. This needs to change. Before this law went into affect, communities across the country enjoyed a varity of programming options: Competing news stations. Competing music stations. Competing talk stations. The broadcasters claim there is competition in the marketplace, but it has been squeezed into a compact homogenized corporate cluster. Since the Act became law, diversity has taken a back seat. The multiple voices that once graced the airwaves have disappeared. Broadcast ownership rules stated (prior to 96) that a broadcast company could cover no more than 25-percent of the market share. Now it is at 35-percent. This applies to both radio and television stations. This is purely a monopoly of the worst kind.Independent radio or television stations are not able to fairly compete in a market. Prior to the 1996 law, broadcast companies were only allowed to own no more than 12 of each broadcast property--nationally. Twelve radio (AM or FM, combo's), and twelve television stations. This was known as the "12/12/12 rule". This rule was later adjusted upwards to fifteen(15/15/15). Additionally, In a summary from Museum TV.com the manner in which an owner renews their license has also changed. "Terms of license for both radio and television have been increased to eight years and previous rules allowing competing applications for license renewals have been dramatically altered in favor of incumbent licensees. New provisions under the act prevent the filing of a competing application at license renewal time unless the FCC first finds that a station has not served the public interest or has committed other serious violations of agency or federal rules. This provision will make it increasingly difficult for citizen's groups to mount a license challenge against a broadcast station." The previous period for comment from the public on a license was prior to the end of a three (3) year term. This 8 year term for holding a license is blantely unfair to the public and communities everywhere. Terms of a license must be pushed back to the original three-year term. Prior to this legislation, there was diversity in the airwaves. Especially on radio. There was diversity in music, talk, and educational programming--allowing free-form formats to exist and thrive on college campuses across the country. Finally, there is a jobs component to this. After this legislation took affect, various broadcast publications (Broadcast and Cable) estimated that approx. 75,000+ jobs would be eliminated as a result of this bill. Repealing this legislation would restore jobs for writers, producers, reporters, camera operators, and technicians. We must restore the sanity and diversity that once existed on our airwaves. We must undo this legislation so our First Amendment can once again have meaning. I urge President Obama, and FCC Chairman Wheeler to reinstate the "12/12/12 Rule" for radio and television. Set market share back to 25%, and Reinstate license renewal regulations back to every three years(3) instead of eight(8) years. Our communities deserve better.