Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Again, what provision of the Constitution do you all want to change?
You have a good point, all that video link in the OP did was spew rhetoric about how we need to do something. Well, what exactly is it that we do?
McCain-Feingold was a terrible law from the beginning, it was only a matter of time before parts of it were struck down.
I'm not crazy about majority owned foreign corporations running fallacious campaign ads either, but we need a constitutional way to go about it. I'm not a lawyer nor a constitutional scholar, so I am not sure how we go about it.
The evil of corporate influence in politics is now abundantly clear to all thinking Americans. I say we quit fooling around at the edges of this issue and prohibit any and all corporate participation in the political process. Whether the best way to accomplish that is by amendment is a matter for debate, but that should be our objective.
I'm dead serious. Think about what our founders intended....it sure wasn't this.
I take it you want to restrict George Soros from using his money through MoveOn.org. Is that right?
The evil of corporate influence in politics is now abundantly clear to all thinking Americans. I say we quit fooling around at the edges of this issue and prohibit any and all corporate participation in the political process. Whether the best way to accomplish that is by amendment is a matter for debate, but that should be our objective.
I'm dead serious. Think about what our founders intended....it sure wasn't this.
I think you need to think this thru a bit more. In this litigious society, I decide to form an S Corp, would you silence my freedom of speech? But people who form a union can empower their union leaders to run campaign ads, and the likes of SEIU can contribute $60 million to an 0bama campaign, or billionaires can create a partisan group to run political campaign ads?
Im not a particularly political person. However, yesterday's ruling seems very, very wrong. So, I guess the answer to your question would be that an amendment is needed explicitly stating that a corporation does not have the same rights that a person does under the 1st amendment protecting free speech.
Corporations are made of of people. Do you support the unions political involvement in politics?
I'll let constitutional lawyers and congress figure out exactly how to write it, though.
How would you expect an amendment that stifles free speech from a group of people?
btw, do you really need to "change" part of it. Isn't an amendment just and addition to it? your question seems a bit off in that respect.
I don't particularly like big corporations anymore than big government but if I had to choose... well let's just say I would rather work for a big corporation than a big government.
I think what people are already forgetting, is that corporations and special interest groups are already running ads during political campaigns.
All this law does, is allow them to contribute directly to the candidate, instead of running the 527 group adds, which are funded by corporations and others without the backing of their candidate.
Surely that document we call our Constitution must be very wonderful since it has only needed amending fewer than 30 times in over 200 years. Maybe part of that reason is because the Framers didn't want it easily amended so they made the amending process a bit involved and not easy to do.
Again, someone comes on talking about amendment like it is very easy to do and must always happen because they don't like something that one branch or another did yesterday.
Again, I feel it necessary to tell you and your boy that amendments can be proposed by Congress or by a Convention called by a 2/3 vote of Congress. Then that amendment has to be approved by 3/4 of state legislatures or by state conventions determined by Congress. Most usually, in recent years the amendment has needed to be ratified in a set term of years, most commonly 5 or 7 or it dies.
It is not easy to propose an amendment because you need 2/3 of Congresscritters to vote for it, but then it gets tougher when you have to have all those states approve of ratify it.
Your amendment concerns a Supreme Court decision of many years ago when they said that corporations are the same as individuals when it comes to freedom of speech. Since corporations have to be treated as individuals in all court cases, why wouldn't they have freedom of speech, also. You want to punish them for being there although they provide the jobs that feed and clothe the people. That is what you are saying.
This suggested amendment sounds so much like Obama speaking out against those nasty corporations that I would think that amendment over this decision would make liberals want to just amend and amend. Why do they want to do that since they really don't pay much attention to the Constitution anyway?
You were doing very well until that last paragraph, which, IMO, turned your whole post into a diatribe against those who think differently than you do. I disagree with the OP's suggestion and reasoning for an amendment. But I don't disagree that this country needs more restraint in how it funds and runs political campaigns. What needs to happen is cogent, unbiased discussion with all sides and all sides need to understand what the problem actually is before anyone can suggest actual solutions to it.
We cannot have a government that is bought and paid for by huge multinational corporations. We need a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
Since the Supreme Court is now apparently controlled by activist judges, I think a Constitutional Amendment would send a signal that the legislature makes laws.
The court did not make law. They found congress abridged free speech, which they are not allowed to do.
As has been stated before, our nation is not run as a 'pure democracy' - never has been. We are what is called a constitutional republic, with democratically elected representatives.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
