Skip to main content

A different view: Why "Citzens United v. FEC" is not the end of democracy

There have been quite a few folks clanging the alarm bells about last week's landmark Supreme Court decision in "Citizens United v. FEC".


I agree with the 'landmark' designation -- as it is certainly unusual for the Court to overturn more than a century of precedent and until-then-considered closed case law.  For that reason, the decision deserves scrutiny -- especially given the seemingly overt political nature of the decision.


Tea leaves aside, I reject some of the more dire predictions and chicken-little responses from various talking heads and bloggers.


I happen to believe that there are ways of governing corporate behavior that can be used to prevent the potential abuse people are afraid of -- regulation that will withstand additional judicial scrutiny:
  1. Require full electronic exposure of corporate shareholders with more than $1 worth of shares -- this is information that is already available to the corporation (it has to be for annual shareholder meetings and votes).
  2. Require shareholder concurrence on political giving.
  3. Require quarterly reporting of all political contributions as part of SEC filings and shareholder reports.
  4. Ban corporations with foreign owners from political giving.
  5. Require the FEC to post reports on political giving in electronic format within 15 days of the end of each month -- format has to be compatible for easy download and retrieval by the public.
  6. Make the FEC more of a watchdog in terms of activity reporting -- this includes regular contributions to Senate, House and other elections under their jurisdiction.
There have also been some in the LGBT community that have bemoaned this decision as a further dimunition of LGBT power in political campaigns -- because more GOP donations (e.g., Corporations) means less chances of retaining a Democratic majority.


Ruby-Sachs at Huffington Post does this:
As an LGBT person in the United States, more Republican donations should be a scary thing. Money equals advertising time and advertising often translates directly into votes. Rarely does a candidate suffer from too much funding in an election. More Republicans in office means more opposition to equality measures (despite what your favorite Log Cabin Republican might tell you).


Here I have to disagree on a couple of points -- first, the current Democratic majority in Congress seems unwilling to push forward on LGBT civil rights regardless... and we certainly haven't seen any real leadership from Mr. Timid in Chief.  Second, the DNC and company are now at a perceived disadvantage in fundraising -- I say perceived because there is no real emperical evidence yet.  That puts the LGBT community back into play as major donors.  "Don't Ask - Don't Give" is just a start.


We have to demand movement on ENDA, DADT, DOMA, etc. prior to opening the gAyTM back up.  Put simply: pass our bills now or no money in the mid-terms.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Just Desserts: Double Peanut Butter Bars

This recipe takes the simple peanut butter cookie and "raises the bar"... with three layers: Peanut Butter Cookie on the bottom Rich peanut butter icing in the middle Topped with a chocolate shell Delicious and decadent! For the cookie base: Preheat oven to 350F.  Grease a 9x13 glass baking dish. 1 1/4 cup sugar 1 tablespoon dark molasses 1/2 cup creamy peanut buter 1/4 cup shortening 1/4 cup butter, softened 1 egg 1 1/4 cups flour 3/4 teaspoon baking soda 1/2 teaspoon baking powder 1/4 teaspoon salt Prepare peanut butter cookie dough (per normal recipe)  but do not refrigerate.  Instead, spread dough evenly on the bottom of the prepared baking dish. Bake for about 15-18 minutes.  Remove from oven and allow to cool completely.  For the middle layer: 1/2 cup butter, softened 1/2 cup creamy peanut butter 1 tablespoon milk 1 teaspoon vanilla 2 cups powdered sugar In a small bowl, beat the butter, peanut butter, milk, vanilla...
5 comments
Read more

60 Minutes & Chevron

I don't normally post stuff about work, but after watching the drivel on 60 Minutes last night about the "Ecuadorian" lawsuit against Chevron, I had to relay this: Images are of Petroecuador sites and are not Texaco-remediated sites: The images of oil pits, and oil operations in general, that “60 Minutes” used are of locations that are the sole responsibility of Petroecuador, Texaco Petroleum’s partner from the days of the consortium. “60 Minutes” knew this fact, but chose to ignore it in its reporting. No responsibility was placed on Petroecuador: Petroecuador has been the sole operator of oil fields in Ecuador since 1992 and has compiled a well-documented record of environmental mismanagement. In addition, Petroecuador has repeatedly stated that it is responsible for the remaining cleanup work that is required in the Ecuadorian Amazon and it readily admits that it has not cleaned up the sites allocated to them under the remediation action plan 15 years ago. Again, “60 M...
Post a Comment
Read more

Promise? What Promise?

from the NYT " The Caucus " blog... "A gaggle of sign-waving protestors milled around outside The Beverly Hilton, the sprawling hotel on Wilshire Boulevard. They must have caught the president’s eye when he arrived at the hotel from an earlier stop in Las Vegas because he relayed one of their messages to the crowd. 'One of them said, “Obama keep your promise,’ the president said. 'I thought that’s fair. I don’t know which promise he was talking about.' The people in the audience – who paid $30,400 per couple to attend – laughed as they ate a dinner of roasted tenderloin, grilled organic chicken and sun choke rosemary mashed potatoes." Feel free to take this image and put it on your blog -- or even on a poster or t-shirt. Just do me the favor of linking back here and/or putting a link to your blog (or a picture of the graphic in action) in the comments. Thanks!
2 comments
Read more