General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Supreme Court has to look in the mirror.
It was their Citizens United decision that opened the floodgates for illicit contributions into our political system. It was that decision that has led to all these foreign contributions we are now witnessing.
The Citizens United decision allowed corruption to thrive in our political system.
The law needs to be repealed if we are ever going to repair our election system.
The Court said that money was "free speech" when they made their decision.
We now see that it was much, much more than just "free speech".
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)arrogant jerk. Still remember his dissing of President Obama at the SOTU.
NCLefty
(3,678 posts)tblue37
(65,393 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)contributions.
Citizens United isn't a law that can be repealed. Citizens United is a court decision that clarifies the implementation of a whole smorgasbord of federal election laws. Passing new laws would easily change it.
Please remember, Unions, and the ACLU both SUPPORTED the Citizens United decision. Prior to the decision, a union hiring an author to write a book about some election related information, was prohibited electioneering. That's how completely and horribly broken everything was prior to CU.
I also happen to agree that Citizens United was a correct interpretation of the First Amendment, against then-implemented federal election laws. BUT the good comes with bad, and state laws that prohibited corporate spending, while allowing union spending, were also overturned. (Because they're shitty laws)
So now, it's back to Congress. The Supreme Court is done with this. There's no reason to re-visit or overturn it. But Congress is free to craft new laws, repeal old laws, etc, to 'fix' what is still a fairly broken election finance ecosystem. But differentiating between Unions and Corporations will remain fraught with peril, because fundamentally, they are the same thing. I want, for instance, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) to be free to contribute, speak, distribute information, and assemble over election issues that are related to their trade and people. But that means Boeing gets a seat at the table too.
To suggest a possible fix, in the face of the fact that corporations tend to have deeper pockets than most unions, Congress COULD possibly institute some sort of cap on total contributions by such entities. Like NFL team level pay caps or something. There's probably tons of gaming and end runs to some scheme like that, but it would at least be a constitutionally permissible limitation.
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)with Moscow Mitch in the driver's seat. Throw the bums out so that a Democratic Congress can begin the Herculean task of undoing all that has gone astray in our fledgling Republic.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Break Gerrymandering and we become a 1-party political system in 2 elections.
Future 'partisan divide' would be between Democrats and Progressives, pulling in SLIGHTLY different directions on a few issues, and Republicans would be a side-show distraction at best.
dansolo
(5,376 posts)Gerrymandering affects the makeup of the house, and affects the state legislatures even more. This is how some states can manage to have Republican supermajorities even when the states are more purple.
But that has no affect on the Senate. To fix that, we need to focus on the disenfranchisement of voters. That is the real reason that Republicans have been able to win so much. If people who wanted to vote were allowed to vote, Republicans would be clobbered.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Corporations? Not so much.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Can you cite specific examples?
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)cstanleytech
(26,293 posts)It would legally allow spending as people see fit themselves as well as unions and corporations but it would make it harder say for Russia to funnel money to the NRA to hide the paper trail as it would require there to be transparency over the source of the funds.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)If money is speech, fine, it would be good to know whose speech it actually is.
uponit7771
(90,346 posts)... would allow for foreign contributions through cut out companies.
Until otherwise I believe its dumb luck that these two hoodlums got caught and not a vetting systems for foreign contributions.
RVN VET71
(2,691 posts)Granted he said it while the president was speaking, which means he's a dick. Granted also that the president was right and Alito was not only disrespectful but wrong as hell, which means he's kind of a supreme dick. But what are you gonna do? I mean, this is the same court, you'll remember, that declared racism over and the need for voting rights protections unnecessary because, presumably, we all love each other, the whites, the browns, the blacks, the beiges, the rainbows, the humans, the Republicans, right?
UCmeNdc
(9,600 posts)The Citizens United decision allowed corruption to thrive in our political system.
The law needs to be repealed if we are ever going to repair our election system.
CU decision has opened the floodgate for legal corruption to become the normal way to conduct business. Buy your own politician cheaply.
dlk
(11,566 posts)This idea has always been Orwellian doublespeak. And so it is with the corporations are people fiction. Corporations are tax and liability shelters created on paper. The fact that so many Americans believe otherwise is a testament to the fact that propaganda works.