America first. My solution to the Supreme Court ruling. Pass a law in Congress that only wholely

[IsItJustMe]

owned American Companies can give cash donations to political parties.

It seems like this would cut out a huge number of corporations and it seems like this could be done under the heading of NATIONAL SECURITY.

Hell, you could probably even get most right wing folks on board this one.

Just an idea.

[Democrat_in_Houston]

1. I LIKE that idea!

Why should foreign entities influence our elections?

[Tansy_Gold]

3. Well, you know, that we go into their countries and, um,

"influence" their elections. . . . . .


Just sayin'. . ..


TG

[Democrat_in_Houston]

8. Ummmm....and who is lobbying for that? The corporations!

Now, we'll be in a constant state of war protecting corporate interests all over the damn world.

You ain't seen nothing, yet!

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

2. It's a good idea. It's not a solution because the whole decision is just flat out

WRONG, but it's a start towars ome kind of legislative remedy to plug some of the more horrific parts of the decision.

[Toots]

4. And not if they accept Government Contracts

Why should they be allowed to use tax payer money to influence elections. I certainly don't want my money being used for such activity.

[BridgeTheGap]

5. Not a bad idea. How about we just stop voting for the candidates that take the money?

Your suggestion reminds me of Ralph Nader's letter to the top fortune 100 companies based in the U.S. asking them to say the pledge of allegiance before every board meeting. 1 company accepted out of the 68 who responded. The other 67 said they were multi-nationals and would not pledge allegiance to any one country.
So they don't have to "pledge allegiance" but are allowed to use their vast resources to influence our political system?

[Toots]

7. They don't have to actually give money to any candidate

They can just fill your TV with issue ads that favor the candidate. It is already sort of happening that way with the 527s "Swift Boat Liars" etc.. With enough money thrown into it almost anyone can be elected.

[sharesunited]

6. Do foreign natural persons have limits imposed on their speech?

Searching for the analogy.

Subversive rabble rousing gets your visa revoked and you deported?

[IsItJustMe]

10. Foreign natural people and foreign corporations affecting American National Security are in two very

different worlds. Apples and oranges?

[skip fox]

9. I was wondering if there was anything beyond a corporation run state

as a result of this decision.

This thread has already shown two possible partial remedies through legislation that the conservatives wouold pay hell to battle: foreign corporations and conflict of interest (e.g., should Blackwater be allow to donate to anyone who is running for Congress, Senate or on a national ticket? should Acme Road Construction be allowed to donate to candidates running on state and local tickets? etc.)

But we know corporate rapacity and their lawyers' ability to circumvent the will of the law. What might they do? Create dummy "American companies" in which multinationals dump funds for donation purposes? Or can't they give bogus ownership to American citizens in some manner like the mob did with casino ownerships?

Or will the republications say, simply, that if all donations are disclosed there will be no problems? (And won't they then try to twist and obscure the information as much as they can?)

Any way we slice it, this has been a terrible week for liberals and progressives. But this thread, and thinking like it elsewhere, provides the beginning of hope. At least it gave me a small dose of sunlight.

[TankLV]

11. and - it would probably cut the pool of corps by NINTY PERCENT or more!!!

now that most of those with the bucks are all in the Bahamas or some such tax haven...

[stellad]

12. Pass a law to EXPAND the Supreme Court NOW. No more sneaky traitorous 5-4 bullshit

A new Supreme Court with a progressive majority can overturn all this crap.

[Nite Owl]

13. Now if we could do

wholly owned companies that solely employ American citizens it would neuter the SCOTUS ruling. :)

[Statistical]

14. WTF is a "wholely owned Amercian companies"?

Corporations issue shares to shareholders.

SHAREHOLDERS own corporations. Period.

This idea of American companies vs "not American" companies is a meaningless distinction.


McDonalds, Ford, GM, Boeing, hell even General Dynamics & Lockheed Martin have shares owned by foreign nationals.
China Mobile, Vodafone, Barclays, etc have shares owned by Americans.

It is entirely possible in the future for example for Toyota to employ more Americans than GM does. If Toyota american? What if Americans own more shares of Toyota than any other nationality.

CORP IS CORP.
They issues shares, profits, power to shareholders. "American corps" aren't somehow better than "non American corps.

[IsItJustMe]

17. You make a good point, but I am sure that several things would be taken into consideration in

determining that. Where is the Corp. Headquarters? Who owns the majority of stock? Where is the majority of profit made for this Corp? Where are the majority of assets located for this Corp.?

Just saying it's an idae. And where there is an idea, there is a way.

[Statistical]

20. More broadly the point is none of that matters.

Corporations have no loyalty to the US regardless of who owns the stock, where the profit is made, where assets are located.

Corporations exists for one reason and one reason only. To produce profits for shareholders.
They have no loyalty to USA, employees, local govt, or anyone.

They will operate in the best interest of shareholders to the detriment of society, the country, the govt, etc.

So making a distinction between "good corps" and "bad corps" is meaningless.

Also there are some issues.

Stock ownership is anonymous. There are guesstimates on how much stock is owned by varies entities but no exact figures.

[skip fox]

15. I hope you're right, but what's to prevent the following:

Corporation X is American owned (enough to fit law's definition).

Corporation Y is not.

Corporation Y buys material from Corporation X paying $200,000 more than market value. Corportion X donates $200,000 more to a senate candidate favoring Corporation Y's interests.

*************************************

That would be an opening move. Before the lawyers had their breakfasts.

[Statistical]

16. Even easier.

Corp A is "American corp".
Corp A exists solely as lobbying arm for corp x,y & z which are not "American corp".

Anyways there is no such thing as an "American corp".
Corps ONLY loyalty is to shareholders. PERIOD.

Shareholders are dynamic, global, and ever changing.
Any distinction of "American" vs "Non-American" is meaningless and nothing more than feel good legislation.

[Javaman]

18. I have a better idea, remove personhood from corporations.

A lot more gets solved that way.

[Stevenmarc]

19. How about, you can only give money if you pop out of a uterus.

[last1standing]

21. They can't (at least not Constitutionally).

The supreme court ruling gives full Constitutional rights to corporations as citizens of the United States. Congress can't limit this without a Constitutional Amendment that specifically states that only a natural born human being can have Constitutional rights.

Its amazing and humiliating that this should be the case, but apparently in the USofA we need to put exactly who is a human being into the Constitution - not for the first time.

[Subdivisions]

22. Pass a law? How? Dems in Congress have proven that they can't

pass a fart without repub support. How can we expect to pass a law in Congress to negate a law passed in the SCOTUS that favors repubs (and corporate Democrates) in their elections?

[yurbud]

23. an even better idea: if corporations have ANY foreign shareholders, they can't make donations

that's like Shylock trying to get his pound of flesh without shedding any blood.

[TheKentuckian]

24. That might make the teabaggers pause a second but I don't see how it really applies

nor does it resolve the real problem of corporate influence/wholesale buyout.

Even 100% American owned companies have no problem taking actions against the general welfare of the people. There is no such thing as corporate loyalty or patriotism.