Supreme Court Rolls Back Corporate Campaign Spending Limits
lorenlal writes "The Supreme Court of the United States must have figured that restrictions on corporate support of candidates was a violation of free speech, or something like that." From the AP story linked above:
"By a 5-4 vote, the court on Thursday overturned a 20-year-old ruling that said corporations can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to pay for campaign ads. The decision, which almost certainly will also allow labor unions to participate more freely in campaigns, threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states."
Unions too.
Best Slashdot Co
I read up quickly on the methods Canada takes on this, because we actually have - what I would consider - sane laws on this subject.
We limit individuals to a maximum $5000 donation. We limit corporations to a maximum $1000 donation.
Finally, and most importantly, we limit the amount any campaign can spend. For a major federal election, it has to do with the last cycle's vote pull. The major parties generally have gotten around $20 million as a cap for any election.
Contrast this with quotes I remember of saying that the 2008 presidential election in the states ran in excess of a billion dollars.
Just for reference, if you guys down there ever feel like fixing your shit.
.
From wikipedia
Fascism, pronounced /fæzm/, is a political ideology that seeks to combine radical and authoritarian nationalism with a corporatist economic system, and which is usually considered to be on the far right of the traditional left-right political spectrum.
To speak: This ruling allows corporations unlimited spending, which tends toward corparatism. The fact that the Executive Branch's power has grown after 9/11, and has not retracted under Obama, along with the "you are with us or against us" patriotic thuggery from the far right, has the US tending toward (though not there yet, thankfully) authoritarian nationalism. Finally, the conservative judges made this possible, along with the far right being the harbinger of the nationalism, and we are well on our way.
Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
I think you numbers are out of date.
The individual limit for Canadian federal parties is $1100 and $0 for corporations/unions.
One difference between the US and Canada is that while Canada has the right to freedom of expression in the constitution, it also says "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." This weakens our rights somewhat compared to the US, but avoids problems like this.
Or on the other hand, we might reason that regardless of the sophistication of their reasoning, it must have some (perhaps hidden) flaw, because of the conclusions they've reached. (I.e., that corporations have free-speech rights that are so sacrosanct that they can legally de facto buy legislation). I'm not exactly sure what options this leaves us, shy of revolution. Which despite the bravado we often exhibit on this site, would have tragic consequences in terms of lost or ruined lives of innocent persons.
The solution in that case is the same: if the constitution is so unclear on a certain point that through sophisticated reasoning it can come to a point that none of us like, then the solution is to amend the constitution so that the constitution IS clear, and there is no disagreement. My understanding is this exact thing happened with the 14th Amendment. There was a complicated court case that concluded slaves have no protection under the constitution, and then the 14th amendment was enacted to make sure they do.
Qxe4
The debt overhang is a lot worse than it was during the depression. Unemployment is getting pretty close - it was 25% during the depression and U6 is probably over 20% now. On the other hand, during the depression the US still had a lot of it's own oil, manufactured its own stuff, and exported real things. So, honestly, it's a lot worse this time than the depression. It's just being propped up by trillions of dollars of government borrowing. It falls apart when people stop lending you that money. I don't know if it'll happen this time, but it won't be that far in the future.
House prices still have a ways to fall. The Federal Reserve basically bought every mortgage issued in 2009. When they stop, interest rates go up.
Keep in mind in your depression comparison that it's only about 1930 now .. give it a few more years.
# "The spring of 1930 marks the end of a period of grave concern...American business is steadily coming back to a normal level of prosperity."
- Julius Barnes, head of Hoover's National Business Survey Conference, Mar 16, 1930
"... the outlook continues favorable..."
- HES Mar 29, 1930
# "... the outlook is favorable..."
- HES Apr 19, 1930
# "While the crash only took place six months ago, I am convinced we have now passed through the worst -- and with continued unity of effort we shall rapidly recover. There has been no significant bank or industrial failure. That danger, too, is safely behind us."
- Herbert Hoover, President of the United States, May 1, 1930
"...by May or June the spring recovery forecast in our letters of last December and November should clearly be apparent..."
- HES May 17, 1930
"Gentleman, you have come sixty days too late. The depression is over."
- Herbert Hoover, responding to a delegation requesting a public works program to help speed the recovery, June 1930
# "... irregular and conflicting movements of business should soon give way to a sustained recovery..."
- HES June 28, 1930
# "... the present depression has about spent its force..."
- HES, Aug 30, 1930
# "We are now near the end of the declining phase of the depression."
- HES Nov 15, 1930
# "Stabilization at [present] levels is clearly possible."
- HES Oct 31, 1931