Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

[karim0028]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/...ex.html?hpt=T1

Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has given big business, unions and nonprofits more power to spend freely in federal elections, a major turnaround that threatens a century of government efforts to regulate the power of corporations to bankroll American politics.

[GRG55]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/...ex.html?hpt=T1

LOL. Seems "a century of government efforts to regulate the power of corporations to bankroll American politics" hasn't worked out all that well.

Which begs the question "Why bother?"

[karim0028]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

Yeah, which kind of makes me thing we have just been sold down the river....

If corporations can fund campaigns and as it stands corporations control most of the wealth in this country then they will openly run the political agendas (they already do now, but it will just be more brazen).... Politicians will be openly run by "corporate citizens" who just happen to donate a shit load of money....

[GRG55]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

Yeah, which kind of makes me thing we have just been sold down the river....

If corporations can fund campaigns and as it stands corporations control most of the wealth in this country then they will openly run the political agendas (they already do now, but it will just be more brazen).... Politicians will be openly run by "corporate citizens" who just happen to donate a shit load of money....

It's truly sad that it's come down to this, but one can have an openly corrupt political system or one that is covertly corrupt. I've lived and worked long enough in places with both, and prefer the former over a system where we all pretend that it is what it isn't.

But again, disappointing it's come to this...

[jtabeb]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

Yeah, which kind of makes me thing we have just been sold down the river....

If corporations can fund campaigns and as it stands corporations control most of the wealth in this country then they will openly run the political agendas (they already do now, but it will just be more brazen).... Politicians will be openly run by "corporate citizens" who just happen to donate a shit load of money....

I can expense items and lower my taxable income like a corporation. I pay the lower corporate income tax rate (vs the earned income tax rate, and payroll tax rate).

Wait A MINUTE!!!

No I can't!
No I don't!

Son-of-a-bitch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

EJ was premature with his "Democracy, it's alive article".

It should have been called "Corporate Fascism Trumps Democracy, Corporate communication approved film at eleven"

Free classes on "loving your master" for every lower and middle class serf provided free of charge by your benevolent corporate benefactors (who own your ass, your families ass, your house, your car, your banks, your political system, and the media).

We are just doing "God's work" to help you understand your role as "Peons" in the grand scheme of things.

For those of you that object, Corporate detention Facilities and Relocation centers staffed by corporate private security contractors are ready, able and willing to help you in your "reeducation" process to assist you in finding the errors of your ways. (Death is available as a no cost option, if you desire, we'll cover the euthanasia expenses out of your seized estate assets, assuming there are any, if not we will keep you children alive to work of the debt).

Have a nice day!

Signed, Your "God's work doing" Corporate Benefactors.

And remember, "If it's bad for you, it's generally good for us, and that is God's will, so it is for the good of all Man Kind".

[jtabeb]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

It's truly sad that it's come down to this, but one can have an openly corrupt political system or one that is covertly corrupt. I've lived and worked long enough in places with both, and prefer the former over a system where we all pretend that it is what it isn't.

But again, disappointing it's come to this...

I saw this in a couple of movies once. Starwars Episodes II and III, I think.

Ah, at least there is no more pretense of a Free Market, Society, or Media. (God, what a relief!)

[ggirod]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

Actually it is better than you describe. They CAN'T donate directly to candidates. Instead they can spend as much money as they like buying time and putting commercials out to support or attack candidates. That is so much better than donations that might be tracked, reported, and quantified.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

I can only express my viewpoint from here in the UK which is that the United States is no longer a free country.

[bcassill]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

An interesting bit from Gerald Celente during a recent interview. While he tends to sound a bit dogmatic at times, he's probably one of the more forward looking people out there not just about economics but also politically. Anyhow, one of his comments concerned the rise of alternative media outlets, like iTulip, vs. main stream media channels. Basically, his contention is that the internet will do to main stream television and cable what blogs have done to print media (a.k.a. the newspaper business). This basically means the "democratization of the airways" since anyone with a video camera can create a newscast from their own living room. While most of these folks will not be worth the time to watch, a few will develop a following. Just think iTulip, Zero Hedge, or Denninger with an actual broadcast. The enabler he mentioned will be when folks are able to hook a computer into the flat screen in the living room. I've already done this. Very cool watching reruns of South Park and other TV programs on Hulu. We're already there. I think that this move will remove much of the information asymmetry from the market place.

[karim0028]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

The enabler he mentioned will be when folks are able to hook a computer into the flat screen in the living room. I've already done this. Very cool watching reruns of South Park and other TV programs on Hulu. We're already there. I think that this move will remove much of the information asymmetry from the market place.

I have a nokia n900 , i can hook up my cell phone to the TV and watch videos/tv/hulu as well as play games from my phone on the TV...

Its here... Its a mini computer with accelerated graphics that happens to do phone functionality as well...

[karim0028]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

How dare you not bend over and accept the "welcome" of your corporate masters and the American Dream!!!

George Carlin on the American Dream and corporate masters

[ggirod]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

Basically, his contention is that the internet will do to main stream television and cable what blogs have done to print media (a.k.a. the newspaper business). This basically means the "democratization of the airways" since anyone with a video camera can create a newscast from their own living room. While most of these folks will not be worth the time to watch, a few will develop a following. Just think iTulip, Zero Hedge, or Denninger with an actual broadcast.

If you want to see this happen you will have to fight tooth and nail for net neutrality because the more bloggers tweak their corporate overlords the more restrictions will be placed on the Internet. Add in the fact that candidates will be cozy and comfy in their corporate pockets and dissent will be quieted in a hurry, to be replaced by more cable channels.

[MulaMan]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

And Republicans thought Bush loaded the supreme court with these people to stop abortions! LOL!

Chirstiano-fascists vs. Ron Paul

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

http://economistsview.typepad.com/ec...eople-too.html1/21/10


Corporations are People Too?

[QUOTE-Mark Thoma]Just what we need, an increase in the ability of corporations to exert political influence:

Justices Overturn Key Campaign Limits, by Adam Liptak, NY Times: Sweeping aside a century-old understanding and overruling two important precedents, a bitterly divided Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.

The ruling was a vindication, the majority said, of the First Amendment’s most basic free speech principle — that the government has no business regulating political speech. The dissenters said allowing corporate money to flood the political marketplace will corrupt democracy.

The 5-to-4 decision was a doctrinal earthquake but also a political and practical one. Specialists in campaign finance law said they expected the decision, which also applies to labor unions and other organizations, to reshape the way elections are conducted. ...

Justice John Paul Stevens read a long dissent from the bench. He said the majority had committed a grave error in treating corporate speech the same as that of human beings. ...

[Here's more on this topic from a previous post.] If a legislator votes for health care reform, to limit greenhouse gases, to impose tough regulations on banks, etc., there is nothing to stop corporations from using their billions in profits to target that individual with a blitzkrieg of negative ads. Legislators from small districts cannot match the resources that corporations have at their disposal, and even legislators from large districts would be quite vulnerable. As Andrew Leonard notes:
If the president follows through on his promises to limit the size of financial institutions and to prevent banks from using federally insured deposits to make bets on securities, the banks will fight him with everything they've got. That much we already knew. But now the Supreme Court has handed Wall Street a huge club with which to thwack Obama or any other politician who dares to try to restrain the likes of JPMorgan and Goldman-Sachs. And you can bet they won't be shy to use it.[/QUOTE]

[Master Shake]

Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/...ex.html?hpt=T1

George Will puts it well.

For almost four decades now, what has been done in the name of “campaign finance reform” has constituted the most dangerous assault on freedom of speech since the Alien and Sedition Acts. This is because the government, by regulating what can be spent in order to disseminate political speech and when political speech may occur, has asserted the astonishing right to dictate the quantity, content and timing of speech about the government.

On Thursday, however, the Supreme Court, in a gratifyingly radical decision, substantially pushed back the encroachments that the political class has made on the sphere of free political speech. This was radical only because after nearly four decades of such “reform” the First Amendment has come to seem radical. Which, indeed, it is. The Supreme Court on Thursday restored First Amendment protection to the core speech that it was designed to protect -- political speech. There will be no more McCain-Feingold blackout periods before primary and general elections -- periods during which political advocacy was restricted, just as public attention was most intense.

The court’s decision will be predictably lamented by people alarmed by the prospect of more political money funding more political speech. The Supreme Court has now said to such people approximately this: The First Amendment does not permit government to decide the “proper” quantity of political speech.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/pos...dical_def.html