SCOTUS eviscerates campaign finance regulations: What to do about it

[Joanne98]

No doubt by now you’ve heard that the Supreme Court’s “conservatives” took an axe to regulations that for a century have limited corporate spending on political campaigns. By the slimmest of majorities, SCOTUS ruled today that corporations and unions may spend without limit on political issues and in support of candidates because they have free speech rights under the 1st Amendment just as any actual human being.

The ruling threatens to open floodgates to spending on a massive scale by corporations seeking to advance their own interests against the interests of, well, actual human beings. It should also do nicely to enhance the public’s cynicism about corporate influence over legislators (and elective judges). By itself the mere potential for uncontrolled corporate spending will tend to distort political calculations and legislative/judicial decisions – and the public’s perception of those things. The impact could be most severe in congressional elections where corporate spending or its potential will be most likely to overwhelm actual humans’ spending.

National Republicans are overjoyed at the ruling because they gladly and loudly shill for corporate interests. Democrats are talking about trying to limit the damage caused by this cataclysmic change to campaign financing by enacting new legislation. But what kind? Lyle Denniston expresses skepticism that Congress will be able to find any constitutional and practical solution to this crisis.

To my mind, however, the first step is pretty obvious. Congress should prohibit any corporation from engaging in this new political spending if it has any non-American shareholders or owners. Because after all, foreigners have no 1st Amendment protections.

continued>>>
http://www.unbossed.com/index.php?itemid=2797

That will work! Another benefit to doing it this way is when the conservatives try to block it we can call them TRAITORS!

A one word talking point. I love it.

[drm604]

1. Yes, the foreign ownership aspect is probably our strongest talking point.

This is the point to get across to freepers and teabaggers.

[blue97keet]

3. The multinational corporations who offshore our jobs get to buy our elections too?

a point to get across to true Democratic populists too!

[Kablooie]

2. The big question in my mind is what will the SCOTUS decide next? Abortion will probably come up soon

[blue97keet]

4. The next outrage - free trade agreements in campaign contributions?

:puke: :sarcasm:

[lmrgreen]

5. A good start

This would be a good start. It's elegant in its simplicity and very difficult for the right-wing to argue with. However, the wider issue is eliminating money from politics altogether, which will take a constitutional amendment that establishes a public finance model that politicians cannot opt out of. Public financing eliminates corporations completely and puts our country back in the hands of the people.