Citizens united decision (disposal, live, wealthy)

[Droolrockworm]

How many other people are already tired of the non-stop political ads everywhere you look. I have to believe that the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court last year has made a horrible situation much worse this year. There have been so many commercials/ political ads that are questionable in detail and overwhelmingly negative that do not have the "I am _________ and I approve this message" this year. There is so much money being thrown into this election in unprecidented numbers that muddy the waters of truth. Keep in mind this decision allows groups to place undocumented money into ads without any reasonable checks to hold someone accountable for its contents. The Court decided that money = Free speech and therefore have allowed the wealthy to dominate the debates in this country, state and local elections. I strongly advise everyone to check non-partisan places for accuracy in ads (www.factcheck.org ) or another such place. In an atmosphere where so many are trying to divide people I am trying to suggest a way to find "truth" behind rulings such as this. Another part of this ruling states that as long as 50% of an organizations money/ assets are in the U.S. then they can give unlimited money to place ads and are not required to be identified with that message. I am afraid that this will invite foriegn money to help decide our elections and that the wealthier that you are the more free speech you have at your disposal. What do you all think? Is there an arguement in favor of this decision that I am missing? What are peoples thoughts on publically funded elections which would allocate a certain amount of money (the same for each party/ nominee) might this stop the requirement of our elected officials to be beholden to special interests and focus on the people that they represent. It might also allow them to govern instead of raising money on our time (it might also give fresh faces a better chance against incumbants that wouldn't be able to use their position to raise money).

[strudel42]

I agree with you... I was in Ohio a few weeks ago and, good Lord, about four out of every five commercials were for one candidate or another. I realize from a political standpoint that Ohio is a powerful swing state, but this is out of hand.

The other day I read that out-of-state, nonparty interest groups have funneled about $9 million into advertising in Ohio within the last couple of weeks. (Even in Montana, where I now live, we see ads that, in the fine print, say "funded by such-and-such organization, Chicago.") It is not in the interest of democracy to have lobbyists and other groups influencing state elections. Lord knows we don't need our representatives to be any more in the pockets of corporations and special interests than they already are.

It turns my stomach when I think about what could be done with all this money, time and effort to, oh, I don't know, HELP the people of our nation... I too wish that more could be done to prevent out-of-control campaign spending. It is making a mockery of the system.

[CortlandGirl79]

Rupert Murdoch (owner of Fox News and he's Australian) has given $1.2 million to Kasich's campaign.

[Droolrockworm]

Fox News (right) and MSNBC (left) are also big problems in our society. I miss Tim Russert, although he was left leaning he asked the tough questions from both sides and held people accountable for what they say. Oddly enough I think that John Stewart may be the heir apparent to that mantle.

[CortlandGirl79]

^I miss him too.

[EarthBound?]

With all the political Bull sh*t that's flies around this state it should one giant air port.