A Mortal Wound to Our Democracy?

OK (0.00 / 0)

I agree with the gravity of the problem, but honestly don't see this court ruling as terribly concerning.  Honestly, was there a limit on corporate control of candidates and elections?  I personally hadn't noticed.

Unless and until campaigns are entirely publicly funded and private money gets out (and maybe still then, too) there will be nothing but big-money interests in campaigns and elections.

"GMD's once proud libertarian-socialist"

---

by: wdh3 @ Thu Jan 21, 2010 at 22:48:44 PM UTC

Not OK (3.00 / 1)

There is huge difference between where we were two days ago and where we are now.  The best example is ExxonMobil.  During the 2007/08 election cycle they raised $800,000 for their PAC and spent $46 million on lobbying efforts.  

At this point they can easily spend that much money on campaigns as well and therefor control the election process as much as they do they legislative process.  If you think we have a hard time passing climate change legislation now just imagine the difficulty we will face with 60 Senators that were elected because of ExxonMobil's involvement in the election.

Last year Obama won in part because of the involvement of and small contributions from millions of people.  That effort will need to be quadrupled if not more to match the impact corporate money will now have over our elections.

To take this lightly is to undervalue the institution of Democracy.  While it may be on death's door step already the Supreme Court just invited Dr. Kevorkian into the room.

Todd Bailey

---

by: Todd Bailey @ Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 14:30:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

More like a KO (0.00 / 0)

This decision has the potential to permanently transfer whatever political power isn't already in their hands to the management of large corporations.

It is the culmination of decades of planning by the right-wing judicial extremists Republican presidents have been putting on the federal bench.  The Supreme Court wasn't even asked to decide this question - the majority took it upon itself to expand the scope of a much narrower case.

Let's just take a local example.  Entergy is now free to spend as much as it wants ("independently") to elect Brian Dubie as governor and elect pro-Yankee legislators.

Ditto for insurers/pharma on health care.
Ditto for banks on financial regulations.
Ditto for Exxon/US Chamber against climate change legislation.
Ditto on almost any issue where corporate interests aren't our interests.

This is a far more significant development than the Senate results in Massachusetts.

Some thought is going into countermeasures.  I'm not sure quite what approach will prove best.  I'm of the opinion that a constitutional amendment may be the only real solution, unless money somehow magically becomes less decisive in our political process.

---

by: Michael Inners @ Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 18:28:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Observation (0.00 / 0)

The Republicans and FOX are playing the Democrats like a fiddle. It's pretty embarrassing.  

Any of the liberal/moderate Supreme Court Justices who want to get out before 2012,could you leave now?  

---

by: bozo @ Thu Jan 21, 2010 at 23:15:09 PM UTC

Kagro X nailed it on Twitter (4.00 / 1)

"About 10% of corporations are gay. Does that mean in most states they can't legally merge?"

---

by: Christian Avard @ Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 02:03:06 AM UTC

The political hacks allowed onto the Supreme Court (0.00 / 0)

by those advocating "dry powder" just pissed in the powder keg.

Beware the Everyday Brutality of the Averted Gaze

---

by: mataliandy @ Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 06:09:54 AM UTC

again (0.00 / 0)

Yeah, the gop and Fox news won again.  We already have the best democracy that money can purchase.  I guess now it will just become a corptocracy, without any resemblance to a democracy.  

When you wake up each morning look around you.  It might be the last time you get to do it.  

---

by: Watercloset @ Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 06:48:31 AM UTC

If you happened to be looking (4.00 / 3)

for a strong argument for Vermont secession....

---

by: bill mckibben @ Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 14:56:15 PM UTC

it is simple (0.00 / 0)

Bernie, Pat and Peter need to introduce a remedy.   If the right 5/4 wing wants to go back to the 1800's, we need to go back to the 1700's and introduce a Constitutional ammendment that clears up the whole issue of Constitutional Rights being afforded to Corporations.  Judging by the VPR/onpoint audience this morning, the people "get it".   Next is proxy voting by Exxon in the states that they have registered interests in... On Diebolt machines of course.... in actual exections..

I doubt it is true, but this decision may have blown a little wind on the smoldering dissent of Campaign Finance Reform and Corporate intrusion.  

Whatever happened to 1984?

---

by: hoopmeister @ Fri Jan 22, 2010 at 16:49:09 PM UTC