Supreme Court's decision on campaign financing

[Taumpy]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_431227.html

This past week the SCOTUS made a decision in the case of Citizens United vs. FEC that essentially gives corporations the same first amendment rights as individuals, allowing them to pour as much money into campaigns as they like.

I'm not all that happy with this decision, as this will likely further erode the ability of anyone to win elections that doesn't have some corporate sponsor.

Thoughts?

[What Exit?]

Not much to say, I agree with you.

[vison]

Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to introduce your MacDonald's president!!!!!

[Zenster]

I seem to recall a certain historic American document beginning with "We the people …" and not "We the corporations …". I'm particularly curious as to the logic employed whereby it was decided that corporations are the legal equivalent of individual citizens. The laws and regulatory frameworks that apply to each are, for the most part, of a vastly different nature.

[Zuul]

I seem to recall a certain historic American document beginning with "We the people …" and not "We the corporations …". I'm particularly curious as to the logic employed whereby it was decided that corporations are the legal equivalent of individual citizens. The laws and regulatory frameworks that apply to each are, for the most part, of a vastly different nature.

Yes, the useful legal fiction of using corporations as persons has led to people making the argument that they can then be treated as persons. On the one hand you have lawyers arguing on behalf of the corporations, on the other you have...slack-jawed idiots? Honestly, I don't understand how anyone who doesn't have a vested financial interest in corporations having greater political power could support it.

[CatInASuit]

Will you be able to see which corporations have been financing which person and for how much or will that information not be available?

[Zuul]

Will you be able to see which corporations have been financing which person and for how much or will that information not be available?

If I understand correctly, the decision has little to do with directly financing candidates. Instead, it's allowing corporations to have their own "electioneering communications", endorsing or condemning candidates and policies. Rather than trying to figure out how to get a few million to your candidate of choice you can just cut out the middle man and make an ad yourself now, basically.

[OneCentStamp]

<fetal position, rocking> BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! BROUGHT TO YOU BY CARL'S JR!!! </fetal position, rocking>