Last week, the 5-4 Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision invalidated a sixty-three year-old ban on corporate money in federal elections. The ruling gives corporations essentially the same rights as individuals in their ability to spend freely on political advertising, even if those advertisements explicitly advocate the election or defeat of a federal candidate. One consequence of this decision is that foreign corporations with U.S.-subsidiaries are likely to be able to now spend unlimited amounts on American elections.
Asked by Anonymous at 11:05 PM on Jan. 27, 2010 in Politics & Current Events
Answer by princessbeth79 at 11:08 PM on Jan. 27, 2010
The Saudi Princes put their BFF Georgie Bush in charge before This just makes it easier
Answer by Anonymous at 11:25 PM on Jan. 27, 2010
Answer by agentwanda at 11:26 PM on Jan. 27, 2010
Answer by 29again at 11:31 PM on Jan. 27, 2010
I find it very convenient that the conservative judges pushed this and passed it while the conservatives are not the ones with the majority in power. Hmmm...and who do you think will benefit when every foreign corporation with American holdings can pump money into the campaigns of individual who will further their agenda? And Obama is the big bad wolf, huh? Whatever!
Answer by AnonIsEasiest at 11:42 PM on Jan. 27, 2010
The pubs don't care.
They can't raise as much money from CITIZENS so they NEED to be BOUGHT OUT..
.I mean FINANCIALLY supported by BIG business
Answer by Anonymous at 11:44 PM on Jan. 27, 2010
Answer by Anonymous at 2:41 AM on Jan. 28, 2010
Answer by Carpy at 7:51 AM on Jan. 28, 2010
Is the ruling constitutional? Show me where is the ruling unconstitutional?
The Supreme Court did their job. Free Speech, no matter the speaker... That is what our Constitution Protects.
Answer by grlygrlz2 at 8:29 AM on Jan. 28, 2010
Answer by grlygrlz2 at 8:31 AM on Jan. 28, 2010
Check out some of the top posts today in Groups: