Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite Save As Favorite View Article Stats
1 comment

General News

It's Official. Corporations Rule.

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H2 1/21/10

opednews.com

People have been wondering for years who runs our country. People or wealthy corporations? Today the Supreme Court settled the debate.

Today's decision, Citizens United v. FEC, comes down decisively on the corporate side. It gives advertisers more power than voters, and tilts the balance of power even farther towards wealthy and corporate interests. The newly composed conservative court upset decades of precedent and settled expectations. As Justice Stevens says in dissent:
Congress has placed special limitations on campaign spending by corporations ever since the passage of the Tillman Act in 1907. We have unanimously concluded that this "reflects a permissible assessment of the dangers posed by those entities to the electoral process," FEC v. NRWC (1982), and have accepted the "legislative judgment that the special characteristics of the corporate structure require particularly careful regulation." (Citations compressed).
Today's decision turns paper corporations into actual people, and gives advertisers more constitutional protection than voters.

Progressives can't give up in the face of this setback. Bill Scher and Ralph Nader have called for a constitutional amendment. I'm all for it " though I think we can find easier solutions. We can start by publicly financed campaigns, and add public matches to any private funding raised. Adding speech rather than subtracting it avoids constitutional hurdles. Money has always had power, and always will. The theory of our capitalist democracy is that people voting provides a counterbalance. If money controls business and it controls the ballot box, we're all in trouble.

All of this reminds me of a scene in my novel, 2044.


Our hero finds herself in a political fundraiser, where her boss is raising money for a campaign.

"Why bother voting?" she asks. "Because it's a democracy. The process is crucial. If we didn't have elections people would lose faith in the government, and that wouldn't suit anybody. Besides, it's great fun. Get yourself a drink."
-------------

 

Eric Lotke is Senior Research Analyst at SEIU and author of 2044, an update of George Orwell's 1984. In 2044, the problem isn't Big Brother, it's Big Brother, Inc. In years past, Mr. Lotke was Research Director at the Campaign for America's (more...)
 
Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

What Chinese Currency Manipulation Looks Like

Steel City: Forgotten But Not Gone

2044: Big Brother Inc.

Obama's Home And The Report Is Out: China Takes Us To School

The Private Prison Industry: Resistance isn't Futile

The 2010 Elections: Bring "em on!

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
Now we have the courts basically agreeing with the... by Deborah Emin on Thursday, Jan 21, 2010 at 2:13:10 PM