Citizens United

[TNHarley]

I want to discuss "Citizens United"
I am not very familiar with this. I am always hearing people screaming about it sucking so bad..
Seems to me it is a good thing. For example : dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens' control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security
Granted, like I said, IDK much about it.
Hoping this will fill me in

 

[OriginalShroom]

I thought it was a good decision.

Those who support the control Unions had over elections are the ones who think it sucks.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I thought it was a good decision.

Those who support the control Unions had over elections are the ones who think it sucks.

I don't support unions or this decision.

Money in politics is a net negative imo.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I want to discuss "Citizens United"
I am not very familiar with this. I am always hearing people screaming about it sucking so bad..
Seems to me it is a good thing. For example : dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens' control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security
Granted, like I said, IDK much about it.
Hoping this will fill me in

The case concerned restrictions on First Amendment free expression and political advocacy by corporate entities and whether the government’s effort to restrict those activities was warranted, justified, and met the burden of a compelling, legitimate governmental interest.

The Court held such restrictions were un-Constitutional.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I want to discuss "Citizens United"
I am not very familiar with this. I am always hearing people screaming about it sucking so bad..
Seems to me it is a good thing. For example : dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens' control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security
Granted, like I said, IDK much about it.
Hoping this will fill me in

Here's some background from Forbes Dec. 24, 2012 on the danger of Plutocracy:

Inside The Koch Empire: How The Brothers Plan To Reshape America - Forbes

There are many other sources on the INTERNET to see the consequences of what CU v. FEC in reforming our nation into a Plutocracy maybe.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

We should be seeking to lessen the influence of money on our politicians and this decision had the opposite effect.

 

[Sallow]

I want to discuss "Citizens United"
I am not very familiar with this. I am always hearing people screaming about it sucking so bad..
Seems to me it is a good thing. For example : dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens' control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security
Granted, like I said, IDK much about it.
Hoping this will fill me in

It winds up dedicating control of this country to the people with the most money.

That's what's wrong with it.

 

[StevenC]

We should be seeking to lessen the influence of money on our politicians and this decision had the opposite effect.

Caimpaign contributions are nothing when you compare them to lobbyists. Also the fact that a politian can get a job in a company he helped out. Banning those would be far more effective than reversing C.U.

 

[StevenC]

I want to discuss "Citizens United"
I am not very familiar with this. I am always hearing people screaming about it sucking so bad..
Seems to me it is a good thing. For example : dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens' control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security
Granted, like I said, IDK much about it.
Hoping this will fill me in

It winds up dedicating control of this country to the people with the most money.

That's what's wrong with it.

They have had control from the beginning. Our leaders have acted like royalty from day one. Look at the mansions our Governors live in.

 

[TNHarley]

We should be seeking to lessen the influence of money on our politicians and this decision had the opposite effect.

I just read that it overturned laws that made it illegal for corporations to spend money independently to support a candidate for office.

 

[OriginalShroom]

We should be seeking to lessen the influence of money on our politicians and this decision had the opposite effect.

Until you get the "Money = Speech" ruling, outlaw all political donations of any kind, and make all campaigns Government Funded, you will never see the end of or the lessening of the influence of money in politics.

There will always be someone or something influencing politicians, be it the Ward leader who helps the young Community Organizer get their first elected office to the Millionaire/Billionaire funding multiple websites, "fact checking" groups, Commentators, and even Journalists.

 

[TNHarley]

I have also seemed to gather that it did not necessarily mean that more money would go into elections.. instead it meant that money would enter in different ways and with less transparency... Amirite?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

We should be seeking to lessen the influence of money on our politicians and this decision had the opposite effect.

Until you get the "Money = Speech" ruling, outlaw all political donations of any kind, and make all campaigns Government Funded, you will never see the end of or the lessening of the influence of money in politics.

There will always be someone or something influencing politicians, be it the Ward leader who helps the young Community Organizer get their first elected office to the Millionaire/Billionaire funding multiple websites, "fact checking" groups, Commentators, and even Journalists.

I am all for publicly funded elections. Term limits as well.

 

[AmyNation]

Corporations and Unions were already getting around the restrictions by donating to shell companies, CU simply made it easier for them to elect who they want.

I'm a big fan of campaign contributions reform. We need to stop elections from going to the biggest bidder.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I have also seemed to gather that it did not necessarily mean that more money would go into elections.. instead it meant that money would enter in different ways and with less transparency... Amirite?

It means that restrictions on how monies can be spent in a political campaigns is a form of protected speech. Also at issue is the efficacy of such laws in the age of the internet, cable, and wireless communications.

It is not within the purview of the Court to address the problem of inappropriate funding of political campaigns, or to address the issue of campaign finance reform, but to only review acts of Congress to determine constitutionality. It is also not the role or responsibility of the Court to solve the problem of inappropriate political campaign financing, but to safeguard the civil liberties of all Americans.

It is ultimately the responsibility of each American to educate himself as to the issues and candidates and vote accordingly. That voters are unwilling to assume this responsibility is not justification for the government to step in and manage this information for them.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Corporations and Unions were already getting around the restrictions by donating to shell companies, CU simply made it easier for them to elect who they want.

I'm a big fan of campaign contributions reform. We need to stop elections from going to the biggest bidder.

Do you remember how we got to have PACs around anyway?

Because Congress decided to limit how much an individual could donate. So people formed groups, PACs, with other like-minded people on issues to get their voices heard.

 

[AmyNation]

I lean more and more towards a form of public financing for campaigns. Have a pool, people can donate into the pool anonymously, set a goal and then split the pool between canidates to spend how they choose.

 

[OriginalShroom]

I lean more and more towards a form of public financing for campaigns. Have a pool, people can donate into the pool anonymously, set a goal and then split the pool between canidates to spend how they choose.

That won't stop money from influencing election.

"Donations" of plane trips, cars, office space, cell phones, computers, television/radio time, let alone personal influence...

 

[AmyNation]

There will always be people who skirt the law. That doesn't mean we just throw our hands up and let chaos reign.

 

[sealybobo]

I want to discuss "Citizens United"
I am not very familiar with this. I am always hearing people screaming about it sucking so bad..
Seems to me it is a good thing. For example : dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens' control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security
Granted, like I said, IDK much about it.
Hoping this will fill me in

It's basically giving corporations more power than they should have in our democracy.

Steve Bannon Believes The Apocalypse Is Coming And War Is Inevitable | The Huffington Post

He went to the Washington headquarters of the conservative activist group Citizens United, where Bannon was then based, for a chat.