I guess this might be why someone called me on behalf of Mark Kelly, just an hour or so ago.

@jeridansky I get a lot of fundraising texts from Mark Kelly and all kinds of people. Every one is an automatic block and delete.

@Axomamma I get those, too, and I also block and delete.

I now give out my landline number when a form requires one, unless it's a person/organization with a real need to call or text me. That line is on silence and I never check for VoiceMail, since it's just my emergency phone.

But I obviously didn't switch to that early enough, given all the texts I get.

@jeridansky @ottawasteph @chefraven

Agree re phone calls.

We could do much much much worse than Mark Kelly.

@tc_morekindness @jeridansky @ottawasteph we would be extremely lucky to have Mark kelly

@chefraven ️ @jeridansky @ottawasteph

@chefraven @tc_morekindness I had a good impression of him, but didn't really know much about his positions. So I went looking.

https://www.kelly.senate.gov/priorities/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Kelly

Somewhat too friendly with oil and gas for my taste. But good on a number of key issues. Not sure where he stands on Israel/Palestine and on transgender rights.

I'd love to have a progressive rather than a moderate. But I don't expect any candidate to be my perfect candidate. And he may have more integrity than many do.

@jeridansky @chefraven

>And he may have more integrity than many do.
️

Thanks for the info. That's useful.

@jeridansky @chefraven

"Senator Kelly also introduced the Ban Corporate PACs Act to reduce corporate influence in Washington by prohibiting for-profit corporations from influencing political campaigns and federal elections."

Accomplishing this would be one of the more important things that anyone could do, in terms of America's future as a democracy. IMO.

@tc_morekindness @chefraven That would be great. Not sure how it plays with the Supreme Court's atrocious ruling in Citizens United, though.

@jeridansky @chefraven Right. But... isn't SCOTUS supposed to interpret the law, as set by Congress? The legislative branch is first, and that's, at least theoretically, where change should begin. As long as the laws don't conflict with the Constitution. But that may be where the problem lies.

@tc_morekindness @chefraven Yeah, the Supreme Court's ruling was based on a supposed conflict with the Constitution.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ... is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court regarding campaign finance laws, in which the Court found that laws restricting the political spending of corporations and unions are inconsistent with the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

"With Thursday's decision, the Supreme Court came down with a sweeping free-speech justification that could restrict Congress's flexibility to re-establish new regulations."

https://www.npr.org/2010/01/21/122805666/supreme-court-rips-up-campaign-finance-laws