Topic: End of Democracy... anyone care??

[Spanner 1]

Supremes just ended Democracy for ever, anyone care??...100 year rule overturned, corporations now deemed 'persons', i.e. NO limit or restrictions on political contributions.... Heck, I'm only here for the Democratic U.S. system....what should I do?? ( be nice !!!).

[mark]

campaign contributions as 'political speech' - I believe the operating theory here is "Money Talks".

 

[CycleRanger]

The real issue the original ruling that declared corporations had the same rights as an individual.

A little history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad

"The case is most notable for the obiter dictum statement that corporations are entitled to protection under the Fourteenth Amendment."

THAT's the issue that needs to be addressed now.

......Before an Exxon or Walmart decides to spend a billion dollars to have their hand-picked candidates elected.

That being said, I'll just reach for the popcorn now and let this one roll.  

[Spanner 1]

No popcorn necessary ...Corporations are now free to fling money at whatever candidate in whatever election they want ,anytime, anywhere...all ordained by the Supreme Court...it's all over...!

[BobbyR]

Like it or not the Supreme Court rules on the Constitutionality of an issue , and like it or not more good has come out of that than ill. I was taught that a Corporation is a "legal" person. The good new is the Constitution can be amended. While I don't like this ruling, I have to accept the Constitution a as a whole document and not cherry pick the parts I like, and I don't like this part one bit.

[Uncle Ernie]

If the majority of the people in this country (and we're allegedy a Republic- not a Democracy) had an ouce of intelligence, all the money / advertising in the world wouldn't make them for for someone as stupid as they have in the last couple of elections.  Basically, this ruling means there's money to be made for script writers, actors, photographers, consultants, ad and marketing agencies, et al.  It's a job creation program paid for by corporations who want to get certain people sympathetic to their causes elected. 

YOU have to buy it and vote, however.  Stop depending on a government to do everything- including fixing acts of God.  #$%* happens. 

[mark]

from Associated Press....

"WASHINGTON – Sen. John McCain says the movement he led to reform how political campaigns are financed is dead.

McCain says the Supreme Court has spoken on the constitutionality of political contributions by corporations. The Arizona Republican had sought to regulate them with a landmark campaign finance law he wrote with Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis.

Last week the Supreme Court ruled that corporations may spend as freely as they like to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress.

McCain says there's not much that can be done about campaign financing now."



try not to look so disappointed there guys.

[MCRider]

I'll agree with BobbyR and Uncle Ernie and add:

Corporations are themselves democracies. They are subject to shareholder votes and I think the problem is shareholders are simply not as involved in their holdings as they should be.

Rather than shackle corporations, which I think is wrong, the emphasis should be on educating shareholders as to their rights and responsibilities.

Warren Buffet recently caused Kraft Foods to change the way they were going to acquire Cadbury as they felt it was detrimental to existing shareholders values. Buffet owned about 18% of Kraft. It doesn't take a majority to influence corps to do things they way the shareholders want.

Many school foundations and state pension plans have also exerted much political pressure on corps they own stakes in. If corp Directors want to keep their jobs they should be threatened by the shareholders.

Corporations are not inherently evil and can speak for large numbers of otherwise unheard people. Its the shareholders that need to make their wants heard as to how the corporation they own act in the society.

This would be the right way to run a society based on Capitalism and a Constitutional Republic which uses democratic procedures.

[paulages]

I'll agree with BobbyR and Uncle Ernie and add:

Corporations are themselves democracies. They are subject to shareholder votes and I think the problem is shareholders are simply not as involved in their holdings as they should be.

Rather than shackle corporations, which I think is wrong, the emphasis should be on educating shareholders as to their rights and responsibilities.

Warren Buffet recently caused Kraft Foods to change the way they were going to acquire Cadbury as they felt it was detrimental to existing shareholders values. Buffet owned about 18% of Kraft. It doesn't take a majority to influence corps to do things they way the shareholders want.

Many school foundations and state pension plans have also exerted much political pressure on corps they own stakes in. If corp Directors want to keep their jobs they should be threatened by the shareholders.

Corporations are not inherently evil and can speak for large numbers of otherwise unheard people. Its the shareholders that need to make their wants heard as to how the corporation they own act in the society.

This would be the right way to run a society based on Capitalism and a Constitutional Republic which uses democratic procedures.

yes, corporations are "democracies," in the sense that shareholders ultimately control the direction of the company, but they function separately within a larger society and their primary function is to make money, not ensure personal freedom or liberties. the bottom line always dominates the direction, and corporations making money will only direct our "government" more than ever.

do you want your plumber to run your airline? i sure don't, and i also don't want moneymakers running my public services.

[Spanner 1]

MC = totally brainwashed, capitalism style ...IMO.

[Brown Bomber]

Be nice?, we can't afford to be nice any longer. Washington has sold this country down the river. Our government is rapidly becoming the very thing that the founding fathers fought so hard to prevent. Many of us care, and are sickened by this massive government that no longer listens to the people. Too many Americans are fat and lazy, and think the government will take care of them. The only thing our government is supposed to do is protect our rights, and freedoms. So, the health care plan scam is in trouble?, then they just change some laws so they can bilk more money from somewhere else. We need to get involved and look more closely at the candidates we chose. It will be hard to turn this mess around, and it wouldn't surprise me if it takes a revolution. 

[MCRider]

MC = totally brainwashed, capitalism style ...IMO.

That's a personal attack and against board guidelines and etiquette.

You've got something to contribute?

[Rocking-M]

the problem stems from the acceptance that the Supreme Court has the right to rule on the Constitution.
It does not. And, I disagree with BobbyR on this one. Nothing but ill has come from the acceptance of that
falsehood by the People. It is time for States once again to practice the Jeffersonian principle of
nullification of any Federal Law they
deem wrong for "the people". ("We the People" are not the people of the whole uS but "the people" of the individual
States.)

Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices.
Voltaire

[Gordon]

Corporate Lobbying has been a long-standing tradition and has proven very effective.  I don't really see large, publicly traded companies putting too much money into openly backing candidates and risk pissing off many of their shareholders and/or customers when they can just continue to slide that money under the table to influence the law makers already in place, leaving their supporters blissfully ignorant.

The sky isn't falling any faster than it already was, at least in my world.  

[mark]

a tiny piece of me would like to believe that there was a sincere attempt at reform that was squelched by the evil Supremes.

it seems more likely that the law was loaded with poison pills that The Supremes were never expected to swallow.

'We tried but it can't be done.... oh well.'



methinks they got just what they were after - they look happy enough anyway.

[BobbyR]

I do believe that the States have lost a lot of their rights to the Federal Gov't. And I do believe in States rights. I would not like to see segregated schools and bathrooms come back etc, so their needs to be a document and rule power of law to protect the rights of all citizens.

I have a problem with bashing the Constitution since it is supposed to protect us from the Government. Parts of it I don't agree with but you have to take it as a whole.

I think the financial disclosure laws can work, if a Candidate was being heavily funded by a special interest, it should be in the open and we the people need to decide if we are voting for a candidate or the XYZ Corp or a particular industry. I would be inclined to vote for a candidate that is not owned by a special interest.

Rob is alluding to the fact that the War between the States was fought over a whole list of issues concerning States rights and not a single issue like abolishing Slavery. The War reshaped the powers of the Federal Gov't.



   

[MCRider]

Soylent Green is PEOPLE!

Oh excuse me got carried away.   

But I'm glad you brought that up about corp taxes. What a bogeyman strawman that is. All corporate expenses including taxes are overhead and cooked into the price of the products and services. Hence you are correct. The payor of all taxes is the smallest consumer unit.

It  is a feel good class warfare type argument to "tax" corporations, the big bad THING that no one likes.  And the end payor is the person who consumes the goods/services of those Corps, all of us at ground level.

[Retro Rocket]

MC = totally brainwashed, capitalism style ...IMO.

That's a personal attack and against board guidelines and etiquette.

You've got something to contribute?

Sorry MC but thats an opinion, not a personal attack...

Mick

[MCRider]

MC = totally brainwashed, capitalism style ...IMO.

That's a personal attack and against board guidelines and etiquette.

You've got something to contribute?

Sorry MC but thats an opinion, not a personal attack...

Mick

All personal attacks are opinions.  "MC=brainwashed..." with brainwash having a negative connotation is an attack. Using my handle with a jab makes it personal. Sticking IMO on the end doesn't fix things.

Lots of other ways to express disagreement with a position.

Spanner and I have graciously made up. Thanks.

[TwoTired]

You cannot battle emotion with rational thought. It's all they have... don't waste your breath.

You CAN battle rational thought with emotion, though.  That is the populist way.  And, why politicians are never short of breath.

Mankind are not rational animals.  Mankind are rationalizing animals.

[bucky katt]

i dont normally even look into the politics threads but this new development has me pretty concerned/disturbed. i am really concerned at the direction our country is taking these days.

[tramp]

remember this is a republic
"and to this republic for which it stands one nation under god"
yes i care
how many have written a note to thier senator or congressman

[TwoTired]

how many have written a note to thier senator or congressman

How many voters have bothered to track the financial backing of current politicians?

[mlinder]

how many have written a note to thier senator or congressman

How many voters have bothered to track the financial backing of current politicians?

Amount of money given should have to be printed next to every politicians name every time their terms come up. I mean, hell, food companies have to list their ingredients.

[Rocking-M]

remember this is a republic
"and to this republic for which it stands one nation under god"
yes i care
how many have written a note to thier senator or congressman

ah hell, not this, written to force Southerners into accepting defeat. I don't say it and I don't accept it. But I'm referring to
that damnable pledge.

I do accept that we are a Republic, or should say that is what was intended. Not the Republik we have today.