Citizens United - Just curious if anyone thinks it was a GOOD decision

[NCVol]

Not whether it was correctly decided- as we sit it's the law of the land.  The question is whether it was good for America, our democracy, whether we should support it, and encourage massive, unlimited donations to campaigns, or work to however possible overturn the decision and/or limit its impact. 

At the time, I thought it was the end of democracy as we know it, since a few highly motivated $billionaires and large corporations can overwhelm the money from millions of Americans and effectively buy a candidate, and therefore their votes on every key issue.  I see nothing to indicate that was a wrong analysis.  In SC, "Citizens United" Super PACs spent $2 for every dollar spent by the official campaigns. 

It's kind of funny how panicked the GOP establishment is at the prospect of Newt winning the nomination, which he can do because ONE GUY has contributed $10 million to his Super PAC (that isn't at all coordinated with Newt's campaign!!!).  One person is keeping his candidacy alive, putting his ads on TV, getting his message across in a huge state like Florida, and it really doesn't matter what the establishment thinks about it.  If casino mogul Sheldon Adelson wants to keep funding Newt, he's got $22,000 million more to fund the campaign.  $10 million or even $100 million is just a rounding error on his net worth.  

Anyway, I support a constitutional amendment overturning the decision.  How about you right wingers?  Is money speech and are corporations "people" protected by the First Amendment?  

http://movetoamend.org/

[The One Man Gang]

Considering it killed off a substantial part of the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Act of 2002, it was an unmitigated good.

[NCVol]

Shouldn't we just go straight to a NASCAR format, then?  Why should Mr. Adelson have to go through the mess of funding elections?  We could just take the top 400 on the Fortune 500 list and let their boards appoint a Congressman, then let the 100 richest Americans pick a Senator.  Round out Congress with some Saudis and Chinese and Japanese oligarchs, CEOs, Kings, whatever. 

Less mess and fuss.  Maybe Tennessee would be represented by one of the Japanese car companies!! 

[The One Man Gang]

Corporations and companies have been adjudged in decisions rendered over the last hundred years or so by the SCOTUS and other courts to have the same rights and privileges as other citizens.  By extension, to deny them the free exercise of those rights is unconstitutional which is what the Supremes ruled.

The only way those rights can be denied is by a specific Constitutional Amendment, not by an act of Congress.

BTW, is there any particular reason that only companies and corporations are singled out as having "undue influence" for making political contributions when the labor unions exist solely to channel vast amounts of money to the Democratic Party?

Sauce for the goose, as they say.

[Flummoxed Lummox]

Considering it killed off a substantial part of the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Act of 2002, it was an unmitigated good.

The fact that our resident poltroon thinks it was an "unmitigated good" is all anyone with a modicum of rational thought needs to know. Of course it was a horrible decision. Both Democrats and Republicans are bemoaning the Supreme Court decision (5-4 by the way) now. Special interest groups have far more power than ever before. It was a huge win for giant corporations and a stinging defeat for ordinary citizens.

Hopefully, Congress will pass legislation to stop this.

[NCVol]

Corporations and companies have been adjudged in decisions rendered over the last hundred years or so by the SCOTUS and other courts to have the same rights and privileges as other citizens.  By extension, to deny them the free exercise of those rights is unconstitutional which is what the Supremes ruled.

Yeah, I know that.  Corporate personhood was made up by a clerk, inserted corporate personhood into a headnote, something that appeared nowhere in any actual decision, but he was a railroad hack, and has been the now settled law ever since.  I suppose the original intent constitution lovers of the day thought that when the 14th Amendment was being drawn up, they had corporations in mind, instead of former slaves.... 

The only way those rights can be denied is by a specific Constitutional Amendment, not by an act of Congress.

Yes, thanks for that, which is why I put a link to movetoamend.org.  It refers to a "specific Constitutional Amendment." The question was whether any of your right wingers support the amendment or what little can be done legislatively. 

For example, we might require DISCLOSURE!!???  But maybe that's unfair since it might not be good for business for customers to know which politician person a corporate person supports.  And it could be awfully uncomfortable for the candidates, since voters might actually figure out who really owns their votes. 

BTW, is there any particular reason that only companies and corporations are singled out as having "undue influence" for making political contributions when the labor unions exist solely to channel vast amounts of money to the Democratic Party?

Sauce for the goose, as they say.

Seems a bit odd to say unions exist solely to funnel money to the democratic party.  Union workers make higher pay with better benefits, so that might be ONE reason they exist, and eliminating unions is done with the specific intent of reducing pay and benefits for union members, aka to "save money."  So there might be a little bit more to it than you let on....

But it's a fair point - unions should be under the same rules as corporations, and religious organizations and other non-profits. 

[MRM]

Unions get hitched to a particular candidate. Then if elected, they do a lot of arm twisting to get what they want.

This Super PAC thing is a bunch of crap. It needs to be eliminated.

[NCVol]

Unions/Wall Street/Healthcare firms/Oil and gas companies/prison industry/Religious organizations/Pro-life/Pro-choice groups get hitched to a particular candidate. Then if elected, they do a lot of arm twisting to get what they want.

This Super PAC thing is a bunch of crap. It needs to be eliminated.

Edited that slightly. 

And the interesting thing is it's a broad based, bipartisan consensus that Citizens United and what it's unleashed is terrible, but proof of the corruption is nothing will get done to address it because it's a clear advantage to the plutocrats to have a world where money=speech, and they got $billions of it that they can secretly funnel into campaigns.  . 

[Flummoxed Lummox]

Unions get hitched to a particular candidate. Then if elected, they do a lot of arm twisting to get what they want.

This Super PAC thing is a bunch of crap. It needs to be eliminated.

I agree completely.

You have to know when both Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, agree the Super Pac's are bad, they must be.

[CD]

Just wondering, is George Soros a “plutocrat”?

[Flummoxed Lummox]

Just wondering, is George Soros a “plutocrat”?

Absolutely.

[NCVol]

Just wondering, is George Soros a “plutocrat”?

Just because you right wingers wear blinders doesn't mean we all do.  Yes, obviously, he's a plutocrat, so is Buffett and Gates and lots of wealthy liberals.  And it's insane and undemocratic, IMO, that if George Soros wants to buy a congressman, or WH, he can do it today, secretly, and not even have to revise his statement of net worth because it would be a rounding error for him, and more money than most of the rest of us will see in 10 lifetimes - that's the kind of wealth divide and therefore influence divide there is today. 

Another way of stating this is it shouldn't matter if you occasionally AGREE with a guy, or corporate behemoth, who can buy a Senator or President - that it CAN BE DONE, and without disclosure, is evidence that our system is irrevocably corrupted by money. 

BTW, it's not just national elections.  The same unlimited and secret influences are potentially MORE corrupting at the state and local level, since relatively small amounts of money can effectively purchase a County commission or school board, or blackmail a few key positions in the state legislators....."kill that bill, or find yourself facing an opponent with a bottomless pool of cash, at both the primary and general" AND THEN MAKE GOOD ON IT!! 

bottom line is I can't imagine anyone who thinks about if for more than a few seconds supporting the current system.