Why Are There No 2016 POTUS Candidates Who LOOK Like This, America?
___________________________
NO MINORITY WOMEN THIS ELECTION CYCLE. WONDER WHY?
___________________________
If you’re not rich, or politically-connected with a Super PAC, national office in America is beyond your reach. Additionally, wholeheartedly agree with former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, per his article here.
Robert Reich: America’s entire political system is rigged
The former secretary of labor on the urgent need for a Democrat to take on the country’s moneyed interests
http://www.salon.com/2015/03/04/robert_reich_americas_entire_political_system_is_rigged_partner/
LINK ABOVE, READ SECRETARY REICH’S ARTICLE BELOW
______________________________________________
Wednesday, Mar 4, 2015 9:15 AM UTC
Robert Reich: America’s entire political system is rigged
It’s seed time for the 2016 presidential elections, when candidates try to figure out what they stand for and will run on.
One thing seems reasonably clear. The Democratic nominee for President, whoever she may be, will campaign on reviving the American middle class.
As will the Republican nominee — although the Republican nominee’s solution will almost certainly be warmed-over versions of George W. Bush’s “ownership society” and Mitt Romney’s “opportunity society,” both seeking to unleash the middle class’s entrepreneurial energies by reducing taxes and regulations.
That’s pretty much what we’ve heard from Republican hopefuls so far. As before, it will get us nowhere.
The Democratic nominee will just as surely call for easing the burdens on working parents through paid sick leave and paid family and medical leave, childcare, elder-care, a higher minimum wage, and perhaps also tax incentives for companies that share some of their profits with their employees.
All this is fine, but it won’t accomplish what’s really needed.
The big unknown is whether the Democratic nominee will also take on the moneyed interests — the large Wall Street banks, big corporations, and richest Americans — which have been responsible for the largest upward redistribution of income and wealth in modern American history.
Part of this upward redistribution has involved excessive risk-taking on Wall Street. Such excesses padded the nests of executives and traders but required a tax-payer funded bailout when the bubble burst in 2008. It also has caused millions of working Americans to lose their jobs, savings, and homes.
Since then, the Street has been back to many of its old tricks. Its lobbyists are also busily rolling back the Dodd-Frank Act intended to prevent another crash.
The Democratic candidate could condemn this, and go further — promising to resurrect the Glass-Steagall Act, once separating investment from commercial banking (until the Clinton administration joined with Republicans in repealing it in 1999).
The candidate could also call for busting up Wall Street’s biggest banks and thereafter limiting their size; imposing jail sentences on top executives who break the law; cracking down on insider trading; and, for good measure, enacting a small tax on all financial transactions in order to reduce speculation.
Another part of America’s upward redistribution has come in the form of “corporate welfare” — tax breaks and subsidies benefiting particular companies and industries (oil and gas, hedge-fund and private-equity, pharmaceuticals, big agriculture) for no other reason than they have the political clout to get them.
It’s also come in the guise of patents and trademarks that extend far beyond what’s necessary for adequate returns on corporate investment — resulting, for example, in drug prices that are higher in America than any other advanced nation.
It’s taken the form of monopoly power, generating outsize profits for certain companies (Monsanto, Pfizer, Comcast, for example) along with high prices for consumers.
And it’s come in the form of trade agreements that have greased the way for outsourcing American jobs abroad — thereby exerting downward pressure on American wages.
Not surprisingly, corporate profits now account for a largest percent of the total economy than they have in more than eight decades; and wages, the smallest percent in more than six.
The candidate could demand an end to corporate welfare and excessive intellectual property protection, along with tougher antitrust enforcement against giant firms with unwarranted market power.
And an end to trade agreements that take a big toll on wages of working-class Americans.
The candidate could also propose true tax reform: higher corporate taxes, in order to finance investments in education and infrastructure; ending all deductions of executive pay in excess of $1 million; and cracking down on corporations that shift profits to countries with lower taxes.
She (or he) could likewise demand higher taxes on America’s billionaires and multimillionaires — who have never been as wealthy, or taken home as high a percent of the nation’s total income and wealth — in order, for example, to finance an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit (a wage subsidy for low-income workers).
Not the least, taking on the moneyed interests would necessitate limiting their future political power. Here, the candidate could promise to appoint Supreme Court justices committed to reversing Citizens United, push for public financing of elections, and demand full disclosure of all private sources of campaign funding.
But will she (or he) do any of this? Taking on the moneyed interests is risky, especially when those interests have more economic and political power than at any time since the first Gilded Age. These interests are, after all, the main sources of campaign funding.
But a failure to take them on prevents any real change in the prospects of the bottom 90 percent of Americans.
It also robs the Democratic candidate of a potential public mandate to change the prevailing allocation of economic and political power — no less dramatically than it was changed by Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson a century ago, marking the end of that Gilded Age.
And a failure to take on the moneyed interests sacrifices the potential enthusiasm of millions of voters — Democrats and Republicans alike — who know the game is rigged, and who yearn for a leader with the strength and courage to un-rig it, and thereby give them and their children a fair chance.
As a presidential candidate, I thoroughly enjoyed reading Mr. Reich’s article. Hope you;ll read it and share. — Temperance Lancecouncil
Click the link to be directed to our site. THE ANTI-HYPOCRISY PARTY or read more about us here: https://t.co/tnQgwtmjsj
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
Candidate ID: P00003640
Election Year: 2016
Name: LANCE-COUNCIL, TEMPERANCE
Office Sought: P — PRESIDENT
An Interview With Temperance Lance-Council, 2016 Presidential Candidate, Feb. 10, 2016
Follow us:
https://twitter.com/ANTIHYPOCRISY99
Meet Temperance Lance-Council, 2016 Presidential Candidate by lakefist
Temperance Lance-Council is the founder of gender-equality, progressive, Anti-Hypocrisy Party. She made a history by being the only African-American, female, third-party, presidential candidate who has appeared in The New York Times, a cover girl on NY’s the Long Island Press, and featured in POLITICO. Her beliefs toward the importance of GENDER EQUALITY for Americans made her establish THE ANTI-HYPOCRISY PARTY, in the year 2000, mainly to overcome the “hypocrisy” of GENDER DISCRIMINATION.
1. Briefly tell us about The Anti-Hypocrisy Party (AHP)?
Fed up with politics as usual, she co-founded the Anti-Hypocrisy Party and ran on the ticket as its first presidential candidate in 2000, where the party saw coverage in The New York Times. She’s described as a gender-equality candidate who offers solutions on immigration and for the disenfranchised. She says her fight for those groups will be synonymous with her fight to become a player on the national political stage. The Anti-Hypocrisy Party was founded in 1999 in Los Feliz, California.
2. Who is Temperance Lance-Council?
2016 Presidential candidate Temperance Lance-Council might be the best unknown candidate running in the American presidential race. Calling herself a “poli-acto” (short for politician-actress), like former senator and actor Fred Thompson (Law & Order), or former comedian and actor Al Franken (Saturday Night Live), Temperance Lance-Council does have a few role models to emulate. She began in Hollywood as an actress, but was drawn to political television commentary, where she appeared on Fox News and CNN.
3. Why do you think you are the best candidate for 2016 election?
Temperance Lance-Council is the best candidate because she has a plan to actually fix the ills of this country:
“As a woman of color, my specific issues are how minorities and the former middle-class are being abandoned in the wake of the collapse of this economy. I’m an average American whose had real-life problems, and I would’ve been the only “real person” on that stage.” (DIRECT QUOTE)
4. Tell us what make Temperance Lance-Council stand out among other presidential candidates?
What makes her standout is: None of the other candidates have any bona fide knowledge on that. They can’t relate like I can. I see nothing being done about black and Latino poverty. I have a salient plan for urban and middle-class America that I could have laid out at the debate, that doesn’t pit Wall Street against Main Street.
5. What are Temperance Lance-Council’s plans for Americans if elected?
When elected, her plan for America is:
- To restore America to a place of prominence in the world
- To bring back jobs to restore the middle-class
- To service Veterans properly, as they are currently not being treated well.
6. A little advice for Temperance Lance-Council fans out there?
We also advise fans / supporters to follow us on Twitter @ANTIHYPOCRISY99
- See more at: http://smarterexperiences.com/2016/02/09/meet-temperance-lance-council-2016-presidential-candidate/#sthash.AqSEjIz7.dpuf
Thanks for your support!
2016 Election
#POTUS2016 #Election2016 #Decision2016 #DecisionAmerica #Campaign2016 #Presidentialelections #PresidentialElection2K16 #PresidentialDebate2016 #politics
MARK POWELL: Dreading Bush, Clinton? It could be worse…By Mark Powell, The Californian mpowell@bakersfield.com Tuesday, May 19, 2015 12:34 AM
MARK POWELL: Dreading Bush, Clinton? It could be worse …
The Bakersfield Californian May 19, 2015
“Pacific Palisades resident Temperance Lancecouncil is running as a member of “The Anti-Hypocrisy Party,” which doesn’t sound like a bad idea.”
Full article below: http://www.bakersfield.com/news/2015/05/19/mark-powell-dreading-bush-clinton-it-could-be-worse.html
About TEMPERANCE LANCECOUNCIL
- An atypical presidential candidate for sure, this national office-seeker began her career at a major, upstart newspaper — USA Today — in the mid-80s, and frequented local, cable shows. Later, she was approached to appear on The Hot Seat, an over-the-top, TV staple in Southern California. There, she bantered with the show’s host, Walley George, a combative conservative, “who pioneered insult television,” per the Los Angeles Times (Jean O. Pasco, Times Staff Writer). That was the genesis into the lively repartee she became known for, exhibited in a Boston, MA television show in a dialogue with The New York Post’s Andrea Peyser, earlier in her career. Continuing to give no-holds-barred social and political commentary, she then found herself booked on Paramount’s Leeza, with Super Bowler and former New York Giants’ Harry Carson, where she gave her analysis on professional athletes (with an emphasis on Darryl Strawberry).
- Veering back into politics, she began appearing on news networks, discussing major, global issues, like Saddam Hussein and the Iraq War on CNN; and speculating about possible U.S. Supreme Court nominations on Fox News’ popular, Fox & Friends.
- However, her sociopolitcal aspirations began as child, listening to election returns on the radio, and debating with her mother — so it’s quite plausible that she’d end up on national TV years later, espousing her political views. Although serious about politics, she’s an avid game-player, who equates the same excitement she got as a child watching the televised Watergate trials, with the wonderment she gets today playing charades.
- The Southern-born, Lance-Council was recruited to star in a college production as a young teen, but her first staring role on the stage came at age seven. In broadcasting, she got her start doing PSAs in her home state of Virginia. There, she also co-hosted a TV show, and served as editor and producer for many of the show’s segments. She counts her interview with Virginia’s first African-American governor, Douglas Wilder, (who eventually ran for president) as her most memorable; although she’s interviewed a few Super Bowl winners.
- Add a TV pilot, NBC Universal’s Hello/Goodnight, and stints at USA Today and The Los Angeles Daily News to her credits. She’s even penned a speech for former NBC (Suddenly Susan) star, Brooke Shields, which was excerpted on E! Entertainment. Although she has to include The Maury Povich Show on her resume, it must be said that the appearance was back during its “news-oriented” heyday.
- Fed up with the field of presidential candidates (and egged on by colleagues), she threw her hat in the national ring and in 2000, founded the Anti-Hypocrisy Party. AHP is a gender-equality, progressive party of THE PEOPLE … working class and the disenfranchised.
- As head of The Anti-Hypocrisy Party, Lance-Council made a smidgen of history by being the only African-American, female, third-party, presidential candidate who has appeared in The New York Times, New York’s Long Island Press, The Washington Post in POLITICO. If history books record the names of all candidates running in the George Bush, Florida “chad / Supreme Court” debacle, her name will be among them.
- An unknown factoid about the former cheerleader, pageant girl, and marathon runner, is that she created an award-winning NASA slogan, when her former spouse worked on the Atlantis Space Shuttle.
- Her energetic personality translated into her being a “first-called” contestant on The Price Is Right (she sold her prizes), and The Love Connection (she had a horrible date). She’s appeared in The National Enquirer (“Knockout Beauties Throwing Themselves at Tyson”), and on PEOPLE.com (“Your Real Beauty at Every Age”), People Magazine’s website.
- Her personal life has her as an adorer of small children, but she’s childless by choice — somewhat on par with actress Ashley Judd’s view. Nevertheless, she hasn’t ruled out another husband, or a law degree. She was pursuing her law degree in Los Angeles, when NASA recruited her former husband and she moved to Florida. Her undergraduate work was done at Virginia Commonwealth University and Ferrum College (VA).
