See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: US Elections: Supreme Court May Rule to Allow Unlimited Corporate Funding
Source:
Global Research
URL Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16436
Published: Dec 7, 2009
Author: Jamin Raskin
Post Date: 2009-12-07 16:06:45 by abraxas
Keywords: None
Views: 149
Comments: 8
US Elections: Supreme Court May Rule to Allow Unlimited Corporate Funding "The American people are powerless to stop corporations from influencing state and federal elections. The U.S. Supreme Court may rule on Tuesday, December 8th, or in the coming weeks, in the case of Citizens United v. FEC, that the American people are powerless to stop corporations from using corporate funds to influence state and federal elections. The restrictions on corporate expenditures in elections contained in the federal Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (known as BCRA or "McCain-Feingold") would then be violations of the First Amendment protections of free speech. To make this ruling, the Supreme Court would have to overrule two previous cases, including a 2003 decision, McConnell v. FEC, and a 1990 decision, Austin v. Chamber of Commerce, where the Court ruled that a Michigan law limiting corporate expenditures in elections did not violate the First Amendment. Such a ruling would dramatically expand the new "corporate rights" doctrine that has transformed the First Amendment in recent years, and expose an already-corrupted political process to a new flow of billions of dollars of corporate money. The new ruling would dramatically dilute the vote and the voice of every American who does not control a large corporate treasury. Corporate profits alone - - after taxes - - amounted to over $1.1 trillion in 2006. (Statistical Abstract of the United States 2008, Table 767). The average House candidate in 2008 spent $1.3 million, and the average Senate candidate spent $3.1 million. (Center for Responsive Politics, Price of Admission, 2008). The courts have used the fabrication of the First Amendment corporate rights doctrine to strike down a range of democratic enactments in recent years, from those concerning clean and fair elections; to environmental protection and energy; to tobacco, alcohol, pharmaceuticals, and health care; to consumer protection, lottery, and gambling; to race relations, and much more. A coalition of organizations plans to launch a campaign to undo this doctrine immediately following a ruling in Citizens United v. FEC. Available for Interviews: John Bonifaz, jbonifaz@voteraction.org , 617-529-4611 Jeff Clements, jclements@clementsllc.com , 978-287-4901, 617-281-5350 Jamin Raskin, raskin@wcl.american.edu , 202-274-4011
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: abraxas (#0)
US Elections: Supreme Court May Rule to Allow Unlimited Our foreign aid hard at work.
TRAITORS TO AMERICA SUPPORT AND DEFEND ISRAEL. TO HELL WITH ZIONISTS AND THIER AMERICAN FRONTS: AIPAC/PNAC/ADL/JPCA/NAACP/CFR/FEDERAL RESERVE/NWO/SPLC/JINSA/ACLU/FPI/CHRISTIAN ZIONISTS/AEI/FEDERAL MEDIA/HOLLYWOOD, et. al.
Pisses me off that the real issue--that corporations should not have the rights of people--is not on the table. IMO, that was the worst SC decision in the history of this nation. I agree, this is our foreign aid at work gutting this nation.
Let us get this straight. We're going to pass a health care plan written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it, signed by a president that also hasn't read it and who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's nearly broke. What could possibly go wrong?
Good work...
Hey Chrissy, wanna bet me on what the final vote-count is? :P
deleted
you take 5. i'll take 4. ;)
The opposition or even awareness of this SC case is underwelming. Way to inform the public MSM!!! Nobody does omitting the facts that are relevant to the lives of the serfs better.
Let us get this straight. We're going to pass a health care plan written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it, signed by a president that also hasn't read it and who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's nearly broke. What could possibly go wrong?
deleted
US Elections: Supreme Court May Rule to Allow Unlimited Corporate Funding
Corporate Zionist Funding
#2. To: wbales (#1)
#3. To: abraxas, wbales (#2)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#4. To: christine (#0)
Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner.
My Man Godfrey (1936)
#5. To: abraxas (#2)
#6. To: Esso (#4)
#7. To: Eric Stratton (#5)
Once again, the big money in charge of a few determining our fate
#8. To: abraxas (#7)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest