Corporations Will Choose Leaders Now

[Oh Shoot]

Well, with the recent Supreme Court decision, corporations will now be free to spend as much as they like, when they like, on election ads under guise of not limiting free speech.

Anyone with any sense understands the power of corporate money on public opinion both upfront AND behind the scenes, but it seems to me that we're entering the era that many have predicted, of a Fortune 500 oligarchy.

And they don't even have to be sneaky about it.

And it may get even worse, as the Supreme Court has another ruling due, as to privacy of campaign contributions.

As this newspaper writer says:

The Supreme Court, campaign finance and petition secrecy: It could be worse than you think | Cup o' Joel

"The effects of corporate money flooding campaigns can be somewhat counteracted by know who is spending the money and where it’s going to. Soon, though, we might not even have that. And what we’ll have is millions upon millions of dollars being spent to sway voters without those voters having any understanding of how the system is really working. That’ll be good for corporations and the candidates they support. But it won’t be so good for the rest of us — or for our democracy."

So then they can be both legal AND sneaky.

There's already something wrong with a POTUS spending a billion dollars to land a $400,000/yr. job. Sounds like that will be considered chicken feed in the future.

- OS

[tntnixon]

While I don't necessarily believe that our corporations should have that much sway, I do believe in the First Amendment as much as I believe in the Second. The way we spend our money is the ultimate way we, as citizens, express ourselves.

Corporations also have those same rights of free speech because they're run by, worked at, and patronized by our citizens. So, will there be more spending? Absolutely. Will it always be pretty? Absolutely not. Is it absolutely necessary for a free society? Yes.

[Krull]

The first organization I saw on the news this morning when they were talking about this was a picture of the NRA headquarters. I found that a bit amusing coming from CBS.

[Oh Shoot]

...

Corporations also have those same rights of free speech because they're run by, worked at, and patronized by our citizens....

Something I left out...

MANY "U.S" corporations are not U.S. owned or controlled. And many just barely are, with almost the controlling shares owned by other countries.

And those countries have influence over those foreign corporations.

So you can now have NON citizens (hell, not even US residents) influencing US politics in a way like never before.

- OS

[tntnixon]

Something I left out...

MANY "U.S" corporations are not U.S. owned or controlled. And many just barely are, with almost the controlling shares owned by other countries.

And those countries have influence over those foreign corporations.

So you can now have NON citizens (hell, not even US residents) influencing US politics in a way like never before.

- OS

Actually, this has been going on since before our founding. The French were very instrumental in our politics leading up to the Revolutionary War. Not allowing corporations (foreign or otherwise) to enter into campaign spending and politics is actually a very new idea.

[enfield]

It would be an improvement -- at least corporations know where wealth comes from.

[Guest Drewsett]

Corporate donors and lobbyists have been choosing our leaders and bureaucratic appointees for years behind closed doors already. You're ok, I'm ok? Don't ask, don't tell?

As unsavory as I think it is, I am not suprised by this in any way.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It would be an improvement -- at least corporations know where wealth comes from.

Beat me to it:D

[Oh Shoot]

It would be an improvement -- at least corporations know where wealth comes from.

Yep. Some of the biggest sure do - it came from taxpayers' pockets to keep them afloat.

They didn't even have to provide a product or service for it.

- OS

[tntnixon]

C'mon, OS, don't turn commie/hippie on us. We need you on our side. Don't pull an Arlen Spector.

[saintsfanbrian]

I believe I heard that one of the unions gave the Obama campaign close to 60 million dollars. So why shouldn't the NRA, Microsoft, Kellogg's and any other company that can afford it create commercials etc in order to promote who they would like to see in the white house, senate, congress etc.

It is up to YOU and ME the AMERICAN people to do research and find out the real truth of the people we send to Washington.

P.S. I believe in ALL of the Constitution and the Amendments there to. Not just the ones that affect me on a personal level,

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Actually if it came from a taxpayer's pocket, follow it's trail from whence it came: and idea, a product, a sale, a job, an income, a

tax payer. Depends on one's priorities, but without the job first

you aren't a taxpayer. If you hate business, you're in trouble. We

just have to keep everyone honest. Want to talk about GM

and unions some other time if you think it is just big companies?

Unions had an unfair advantage. They can pick the pockets of their members and use the money pretty much how they please.

How's that for fairness and equality.

[BryanP]

C'mon, OS, don't turn commie/hippie on us. We need you on our side. Don't pull an Arlen Spector.

I don't have to be a commie hippie to think megacorps and unions already had too much political influence. I've always thought the legal fiction which grants corporations the rights of a person with none of the limitations or responsibilities to be a truly awful idea.

[Oh Shoot]

C'mon, OS, don't turn commie/hippie on us. We need you on our side. Don't pull an Arlen Spector.

I'm only postulating that Big Corporate Control should feared as much as any other. Especially when those corps don't even benefit our own population more than foreign ones.

It may well have used to be true that "what's good for business is good for America", but ain't necessarily so any more.

- OS

[Oh Shoot]

I believe I heard that one of the unions gave the Obama campaign close to 60 million dollars....

Unions are not allowed to directly contribute.

Members are encouraged to donate individually to PAC, but no PAC was remotely near 60 mil. Biggest in US was around 4 mil (realtors assn).

Possible, that direct individual donations from all union members could reach 60 mil, but no way to know that AFAIK.

- OS

Edited January 22, 2010 by OhShoot
typed bil instead of mil

[macville]

Let's be honest, can this REALLY make our country ANY worse? We have uneducated voters putting crooks into office, so will it make any difference if corporate America puts someone into office?

Matthew

[Raoul]

I'm always scared at the thought of someone watching out for my rights. I hear the arguments about full disclosure. But if money equals free speech, those with the most money have the most free speech. Corporations currently have the ability to fund politicians with limits and disclosure, and to exceed those limits by funding political PACS. Now there is the ability for unfettered dumping of funds to politicians.

What about multi-national corporations.? Most larger US corps are multinational and possibly run by folks that might not have our best interest at heart.

Who better for corporations to support than those politicians they can buy with campaign donations or in spending their money to produce media exposure.

It smells to me. I can't imagine any good outcome for the people from this ruling.

My problem with this ruling is that the legislative branch has been overturned by activist judges. The supreme court is making legislation through interpretation. This is wrong. We the people have no control over the judicial branch, At least with the legislature we can vote the b@$+@$ out of office. We cannot control the supreme court. You think the NRA can spend your way out of trouble with regards to 2A rights? The NRA is nothing compared to the ability of Multinational corporations to raise money. How much of the US debt does China own? If they decided an unarmed America was in their best interest what's to stop the flow of MONEY to politicians that will push for gun control?

Am I paranoid? Certainly. But this kind of crap is totally possible. When money becomes equal to free speech the individual is squashed.

Are you worried about democrats? They're the least of our worries. The damn Supreme court has allowed our government to to be up for sale to the highest bidder.

[Oh Shoot]

Let's be honest, can this REALLY make our country ANY worse? We have uneducated voters putting crooks into office, so will it make any difference if corporate America puts someone into office?

Matthew

Well, let's see. Which of the Fortune 500 companies would you prefer to make policy?

The ones which would like to charge you more interest and fees, the ones which would like to charge more per gallon of gas, the ones who keep raising your heath insurance premiums while resisting payouts and want to step up the pace, the ones that offshore majority of their manufacturing and workforce, the ones which would want to stifle competition to get IN the top strata, the ones we've already bailed out?

Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train.

- OS

[Raoul]

Well, let's see. Which of the Fortune 500 companies would you prefer to make policy?

The ones which would like to charge you more interest and fees, the ones which would like to charge more per gallon of gas, the ones who keep raising your heath insurance premiums while resisting payouts and want to step up the pace, the ones that offshore majority of their manufacturing and workforce, the ones which would want to stifle competition to get IN the top strata, the ones we've already bailed out?

Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train.

- OS

Amen. We've never been so screwed.

[StPatrick]

Unions are not allowed to directly contribute.

OS

The above is true only if you believe that time is not money. Full disclosure: I disagree with that premise. SEIU and NFSCME were instrumental in electing our president.

They have been very active since, as well: Remember all those purple shirts agitating for healthcare? SEIU. Remember the black guy who got roughed up by purple-shirted assailants outside the St. Louis town hall? SEIU. To deny reality and say unions don't contribute directly to campaigns and political causes is completely irrational and without merit. They simply do it with undocumented in-kind donations of time and manpower, which cannot be accounted for under current rules.

I'll still read your posts, OhShoot, but I respectfully disagree.

[Oh Shoot]

The above is true only if you believe that time is not money. Full disclosure: I disagree with that premise. SEIU and NFSCME were instrumental in electing our president.

They have been very active since, as well: Remember all those purple shirts agitating for healthcare? SEIU. Remember the black guy who got roughed up by purple-shirted assailants outside the St. Louis town hall? SEIU. To deny reality and say unions don't contribute directly to campaigns and political causes is completely irrational and without merit. They simply do it with undocumented in-kind donations of time and manpower, which cannot be accounted for under current rules.

I'll still read your posts, OhShoot, but I respectfully disagree.

That's all well and good, but my statement was quite limited and simple.

Unions can not give money to candidates.

Individual members can.

Now unions WILL be able to "give money" in the form of political ads, unlimited by amount or timing, which of course is the same thing the pols would do with it if they could receive the money directly from the unions.

I suppose the unions would have to get permission from the membership to do it or something, I don't know how budget allocations work within them.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Unions gave more than 60 million dollars to Obama's

campaign. Why do you think Andy stern goes to the

white house so much?

[Oh Shoot]

Unions gave more than 60 million dollars to Obama's

campaign. Why do you think Andy stern goes to the

white house so much?

That may be true, through individuals to PACS.

The afore mentioned SEIU gave 15 mil or more.

He raised about $800,000,000 in all.

Now the unions can spend the $800,000,000 if they want to, have it, and the membership allows.

Look for the next president to buy the seat for at least 10 billion dollars.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'm in a union, oh shoot, and part of my union dues go

to this problem and I don't have any say in it. I also

don't have any say in being a member in the union.

McCain Feingold was ruled unconstitutional, probably

because of the advantage unions and other groups

have already. Did the Republic die before that law

was passed? That law didn't help anything,either.

[Oh Shoot]

I'm in a union, oh shoot, and part of my union dues go

to this problem ...

"Go to this problem?"

Explain?

- OS