Overturn Citizens United
CA has included Prop 59 on its Nov. ballot to advise its elected officials whether or not to propose and ratify an amendment to the US Constitution to overturn SCOTUS decision in Citizens United vs the FEC. Gultch members are a pretty independent bunch of erudite thinkers, so I'd like to elicit their opinions on 1) is the notion to overturn this decision a good idea in the first place? 2)Assuming you think it is, how should the words be crafted to accomplish its goals of a corporate entity or a labor union qualifying as an individual person? 3) Limiting the sources and amounts of money spent directly or indirectly to influence for or against a candidate or ballot proposal? If ever the devil is in the details, this would be it.
Add Comment
All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read
- 1Posted by $ CBJ 8 years, 1 month agoIn today’s political and legal environment there is no fully right answer. I would favor requiring the government to treat all private associations and businesses on an equal basis, establishing a “level playing field.” This would mean no special privileges for corporations, labor unions, political parties, businesses or religious organizations. I would also favor requiring any communications between legislators and private citizens seeking to influence legislation (in other words, lobbyists) to be totally transparent and available to everyone, perhaps through the Internet. Once these reforms were implemented, I would favor having no limits on the amount that could be spent on political advertising by individuals or voluntary associations of any kind.Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink|
- 1Posted by $ WilliamShipley 8 years, 1 month agoI think that a corporation should be free to express opinions on matters that affect the interests of its stockholders -- and that can mean spending money on ads.Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink|