Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Time to Reign in Out-of-Control Corporate Influences on Our Democracy

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 10:57 AM
Original message
Time to Reign in Out-of-Control Corporate Influences on Our Democracy
Published on Saturday, January 23, 2010 by CommonDreams.org

Time to Reign in Out-of-Control Corporate Influences on Our Democracy

by Ralph Nader


Thursday's 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission shreds the fabric of our already weakened democracy by allowing corporations to more completely dominate our corrupted electoral process. It is outrageous that corporations already attempt to influence or bribe our political candidates through their political action committees (PACs), which solicit employees and shareholders for donations.

With this decision, corporations can now directly pour vast amounts of corporate money, through independent expenditures, into the electoral swamp already flooded with corporate campaign PAC contribution dollars. Without approval from their shareholders, corporations can reward or intimidate people running for office at the local, state, and national levels.

Much of this 183 page opinion requires readers to enter into a fantasy world and accept the twisted logic of Justice Kennedy, who delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Scalia, Alito, and Thomas. Imagine the majority saying the "Government may not suppress political speech based on the speaker's corporate identity."

Perhaps Justice Kennedy didn't hear that the financial sector invested more than $5 billion in political influence purchasing in Washington over the past decade, with as many as 3,000 lobbyists winning deregulation and other policy decisions that led directly to the current financial collapse, according to a 231-page report titled: "Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America" (See: WallStreetWatch.org).

The Center for Responsive Politics reported that last year the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spent $144 million to influence Congress and state legislatures.

The Center also reported big lobbying expenditures by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) which spent $26 million in 2009. Drug companies like Pfizer, Amgen and Eli Lilly also poured tens of millions of dollars into federal lobbying in 2009. The health insurance industry trade group America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) also spent several million lobbying Congress. No wonder Single Payer Health insurance - supported by the majority of people, doctors, and nurses - isn't moving in Congress.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/23
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ellenfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. interesting use of 'reign' where should be 'rein'. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moostache Donating Member (905 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
2. How about this idea?
Instead of attempting to fight the corporations, we should fight to expose them and their intentions. We CAN establish laws and limits to speech when there is an exchange of benefits for the right to use money as an advantage in free speech cases. The courts have long upheld the right of the people to place limits on entities in exchange for benefits and its constitutionality is not in doubt. I would propose the following change to election campaign finance laws:

In the case of any corporation or union making a direct campaign expenditure - on either a PAC or a direct ad or a contribution of $ to a corporate subsidiary or advertising group for the express purpose of advocacy of a position that is germane to the laws of the land or the political candidates for any public office - MUST disclose, in full, the percentage of its shareholders or members who voted "NO" on the proposed expenditure, campaign or advertisement. This information would be required to be displayed BEFORE and AFTER any political advertisements.

This would prevent them from being able to hide dissent. It would give voice to the people in unions and corporations that are currently forced to agree with positions that they oppose. It would allow us to at least expose the intentions of those who would seek policy that benefits the few at the continued expense of the many and it would empower dissenting shareholders to give voice to their opposition as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 07:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC