is citizens united the end of the republic as we knew it

Haiku said:
Corporations are people?
Click to expand...

Yes, to put it in simple terms you can understand, the SCOTUS found, corporations are people. They are not evil monsters lumbering out of control, trampling our freedoms and rights. They are comprised of people, run by people, and represent people, the same as a union, a PAC, or special interest group.

Again, you want to reform campaign finance and get the evil corrupt rich people money out of it? Do what Dick Army suggested; ban ALL political contribution except for individual $1,000 donations, which would have to be documented and accounted for. That means, MoveOn.org goes tits up, George Soros finds a new hobby, the Unions find other ways to represent their constituents, and campaigns are financed by individuals at the grass roots level, and nothing else.

Thing is.... I don't believe that is what Liberals want at all. What you want, is a system that lets liberal interests funnel as much money as they can to whomever they please, with no accountability, while republicans have to grovel for pennies and jump through hoops. We're NOT going to adopt such a system, so you should just give up on that.
 
Dixie said:
Another example of why you are a fucking clueless idiot.
Click to expand...

Corporations may represent the interests of individual people, but they are not, themselves, individual people, and so deserve less protection and closer scrutiny. As the saying goes, "together, we are dumber." I could see restricting the contributions of PACs, corporations, and unions, if these institutions are ever declared to "not be persons," but so long as they are, they should have unlimited cashflow, because I don't want to be told that I as an individual cannot give as much as I want to a campaign or cause.
 
Threedee said:
Corporations may represent the interests of individual people, but they are not, themselves, individual people, and so deserve less protection and closer scrutiny. As the saying goes, "together, we are dumber." I could see restricting the contributions of PACs, corporations, and unions, if these institutions are ever declared to "not be persons," but so long as they are, they should have unlimited cashflow, because I don't want to be told that I as an individual cannot give as much as I want to a campaign or cause.
Click to expand...

No, the Supreme Court found that 'corporations' WERE people, and any organized group such as a 'corporation' IS people, and are protected by the Constitution equally. The really fascinating thing about Don's alarmist cry... What Citizens United did, was perfectly legal and acceptable for all those years BEFORE Campaign Finance Reform. Had they done what they did before McCain-Feingold, there would have been no case. It was the result of McCain-Feingold which made what Citizens did, some big deal. It was challenged, as is often the case with new sweeping reform laws, and the SCOTUS ruled appropriately. It's not the end of the world as we know it, it's the return of the world we always had known, before CFR.
 
Don Quixote said:
imo, yes

how can any democratic institutions survive the massive amounts of cash that the wealthy can contribute?

perhaps the voters will learn to ignore the ever more sophisticated ads bought by super pacs

it is given that federal offices will be bought by billionaires but how deep will their contributions reach into state offices - i think that they will buy governors and state legislators thereby getting whatever laws are need for the contributors interests

the other aspect about the contributions is that they can be anonymous thereby concealing just who is attacking a candidate - scotus has yet to rule on this aspect and we can only hope that congress will correct the anonymous provisions of contribution laws, but i am not holding my breath

the only thing that might save us is a constitutional amendment and the window for that is closing - not only to get it through congress but through the state legislatures

however, i think the time for despair is at hand and the voices of the people will be drowned out by a sea of cash
Click to expand...


So.....
ALL POLITICIANS are for sale
EVERY POLITICIAN can be bought
THEY ALL ACCEPT BRIBES
THEY ALL SELL THEIR VOTES

Yet............its the only the fault of the rich that buy them.....
I guess if you have a good looking chick grab your dick and take you to bed, its all her fault, right.....its not yours.....
If your wife finds a boyfriend, its the guys fault, it can't be her fault......

All flawed logic of the narrow-minded liberal .... all blame for wrong doing goes to someone else.....never the one that does the deed
 
Dixie said:
No, the Supreme Court found that 'corporations' WERE people, and any organized group such as a 'corporation' IS people, and are protected by the Constitution equally. The really fascinating thing about Don's alarmist cry... What Citizens United did, was perfectly legal and acceptable for all those years BEFORE Campaign Finance Reform. Had they done what they did before McCain-Feingold, there would have been no case. It was the result of McCain-Feingold which made what Citizens did, some big deal. It was challenged, as is often the case with new sweeping reform laws, and the SCOTUS ruled appropriately. It's not the end of the world as we know it, it's the return of the world we always had known, before CFR.
Click to expand...

Also, the age of over-the-top PACs has been a much more devastating environment than what existed before. People still think that corporations and unions can ruin the political discourse, yet what we got from CFR was a monster by comparison. I should think everyone here can pretty much agree on that point, at least.
 
Threedee said:
Also, the age of over-the-top PACs has been a much more devastating environment than what existed before. People still think that corporations and unions can ruin the political discourse, yet what we got from CFR was a monster by comparison. I should think everyone here can pretty much agree on that point, at least.
Click to expand...

It's not PACs so much as it is the 527 groups. Before CFR, these were largely 'anonymous' donors, we didn't know who they were or anything about them, at least with a 527 front group, we know something. Look, the amount of money contributed didn't change with CFR, the sources and disclosures changed. Wealthy contributors are always going to find a way around whatever obstacle you put in place. Making money more scarce is not going to lessen the importance of money, it tends to have the opposite effect.

People who are up in arms about 'corporations' donating, or ANY other group, 527s, unions, PACs... the only way we can 'fix' the problem is what Dick Army suggested; Limit contributions to no more than $1k per individual donor, and nothing else. You do that, and suddenly, there are no PACs or 527s. Unions and special interests will have to make their donations on an individual basis, as well as corporations. This would be the ultimate solution to campaign finance reform, but guess what? Not very many Congressmen are on board with such an idea, because it kills the cash cow. Liberals like Don, are particularly uninterested, because it would mean the end to the MoveOn.org's and George Soros. What they would prefer, is to hamstring corporations (largely Republican contributors), while allowing unions to continue funding Democrats, and the 527s to continue funneling money to mostly Democrat candidates. THAT is what they are after, and all they need is to dupe a few idiot centrists into buying their alarmist rhetoric.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top