From Politico:
Unless you’re able to amend the Constitution, there is nothing you can do.
I don’t know about that.
I suspect if someone could talk Bill Gates or Warren Buffet into pumping a billion bucks into the Democrats’ PAC’s, and the Republicans took a shellacking in November as a result, that there might be some bipartisan support for campaign finance reform, and that somehow the Supreme Court might think again about Citizens’ United.
Doubt it. George Soros spent $23M in the 03-04 elections and look what that got us.
:rolleyes:
And if frogs grew wings, they would not bump their asses when they hop around.
Money != speech. And freedom of speech != the freedom to buy the most time on the loudest amplifier in the room.
Man, Republicans are stupid to be wasting that much money. After all, everyone knows that money doesn’t influence elections at all.
But in the conservative POV (or at least the ones I’ve read, whether representative or not), it all fits together, really: businesses and wealthy individuals buy elections. Therefore the problem is government; if it weren’t so powerful, it wouldn’t matter. Ergo, it’s a reason to destroy as much of it as possible.
It’s long been know that the Obama administrations re-election fund rasing goal has been to collect $1 billion. Is there a rule that says Obama can try to raise $1 billion but no one else can?
For myself, the problem is that there IS no difference. There must come a point where this kind of money arms race is absurd, counterproductive, and unhealthy for the process.
Wouldn’t it be cheaper just to pay your taxes?
It influences election less than some people think but it does have appreciable influence. However, the influence I fear is the continued heightening of partisanship. Already polarized people who don’t listen to anyone they disagree with will be inundated with even more ads from people they agree with. Then, even if they lose the election they will be all “they STOLE the election! Let’s take OUR country back! I don’t know ANYONE who voted for the other guy! All you hear from EVERYONE is support for my side! They’re not real Americans!” I think ads can reinforce this view.
There is no reason for the SCOTUS to “think again” about Citizens United. The SCOTUS doesn’t write our laws, Congress does.
Congress screwed up when they rewrote the Campaign Fianance laws. The SCOTUS ruled that “some” of the things Congress wrote were unConstitutional. Don’t blame the SCOTUS. Blame Congress.
Congress can readdress Campaign Fianance any time they wish. And this time, maybe they can get it right.
Cite to controlling legal authority?
The Supreme Court could be unreasonably blocking law that should be constitutional through a combination of morality and constitutional law. To look at low hanging fruit, some Supreme Court decisions are very close: what makes the four dissenting justices absolutely and incontrovertably wrong-headed, when they collectively have almost as much experience and knowledge as the majority?
We all know of otherwise intelligent people who happen to be wrong on any given issue. It doesn’t mean that the entire court consists of constitutional doofuses to think that the opinions of the majority are in the wrong compared to those of the minority, who are themselves noted scholars.
Does the SCOTUS make our laws or is that the job of Congress?
Congress can readdress the sections, or even the entire issue, of Campaign Fianance Reform at any time. Anyone who objects to how political campaigns are fiananced should be making three phone calls to their elected reps. Everyone has two Senators and one Congressman.
Blaming the SCOTUS because Congress can’t write a constitutional law is absurd.
The SCOTUS makes laws all the time, as it should. Basic civics 101; junior high, even. There is a substantial difference between case law and statuary law, but both have the power of law.
Before you go spouting talking points and asking rhetorical questions, get a clue about how the government works.
I think it was BrainGlutton v. Any Possible GOP Success.
You must have a really low opinion of Congress if you think that they are so stupid as to write an obviously unconstitutional law. As if you can simply look up the relevant Constitutionality in a book and the Supreme Court is simply applying a very easy algorithm to their law. Like I said before, the fact that many SC decisions are far from unanimous means that the court’s opinion on the constitutionality of any given law is often not obvious.
Furthermore, laws are ruled on partly on their results. It’s not as if Congress could write any sort of campaign finance reform they wanted if only they could find the Magic Words. Some portions may be impossible given the current makeup of the Court, which would rule against the provisions no matter how they are worded. So in that case, it is the Court’s fault.
You really don’t believe in any possibility of GOP success without the money-advantage? I do. I base that on the fact that the GOP has an actual grassroots base.