Because CU has NOTHING to do with this situation at all. You missed the KEY component here that is the problem. It is NOT the fact that companies can donate to politicians that is something that is going to exist no matter what law you pass to prevent it. The problem is the fact that they MUST donate in order to do business in the first place.Any other time the Republicans would be on here saying how great this system is. And what is really grrrrreat is that corporations are people to now. And if good money can be extorted from a powerful CEO, think how much money can be extorted from a powerful corporation.
Anybody want to tell me again why Citizens United was such a great thing for the rest of us?
The power is not located within the company, it is within the politician. The sooner that we eliminate that the sooner we can start to address the rank corruption within the system.
Again, misses the real problem and the whole point. As long as congress has the power to make these companies BILLIONS of dollars, those companies are going to exercise great influence over congressmen. That is simple reality. You cannot make this a one way street. The only answer is to get the government out of the business of choosing winners and losers, out of the business of granting multi-billion dollar tax kickbacks to major companies (or any entity for that matter) and granting MASSIVE contracts to political allies. The source of the corruption lies there not in the donations to congressmen but in the REASON THAT THOSE DONATIONS ARE MADE IN THE FIRST PLACE!Any other time the Republicans would be on here saying how great this system is. And what is really grrrrreat is that corporations are people to now. And if good money can be extorted from a powerful CEO, think how much money can be extorted from a powerful corporation.
Anybody want to tell me again why Citizens United was such a great thing for the rest of us?
Do I have to point out, again, that I am not a Republican? Or that the "nationalize the oil industry" comment that the article is talking about happened when Bush was the fucking President of the United States?
As for Citizens United, it helps you by allowing you to donate as much money as you want to any 501(c)(3) group you want, and it doesn't let congresscritters solicit donations for those groups.
On the one hand you think it not good that Congresscritters beg for money, but it is somehow better if groups working for Congresscritters are able to beg for money. But instead of an individual, they beg the corporation.
Who is it in a corporation that you think has the power to make the decision to make a contribution to a political action group. Would it be the CEO or a janitor.
If the CEO shouldn't be shaken down personally, why would it be OK to shake down the corporation via the CEO?
And you have written a few things lately that made me read them through. That's a good thing I think. You sound more "moderate" or something. Meds regulated? jk jk.
Campaign finance reform does nothing but address a symptom. YOU cannot kill the disease while only addressing the symptoms.