Update one year later: April 9, 2017:
So, what did America ultimately vote for when it comes to Campaign Finance Reform and, more specifically, unlimited corporate money in our government? The original summary of where candidates stood one year ago is included below, but recall that both Clinton and Sanders vowed to appoint Supreme Court judges that would overturn the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision that allows our Congress to essentially be owned by corporations and billionaires. Recall this article that points to the obstruction Merrick Garland received from Republicans out of fear of retaliation from the Koch brothers. Or, the recent legislation that stripped consumers of internet privacy because internet telecom companies have poured millions of dollars into Congress. Additionally, recall that on the campaign trail Trump advocated for getting big money out of politics.
Since then, Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court and he was ultimately confirmed as the Senate voted to destroy rules in tact throughout history that ensure bipartisan cooperation. In his history on the bench, Gorsuch has supported decisions that corporations are "persons." There is no available evidence that suggests he would be opposed to the Citizens United decision, only the contrary.
So, what did America ultimately vote for? We voted to ensure that the system stays rigged to favor corporations and billionaires with special interests.
Originally posted on Facebook on Tuesday, April 5, 2016:
So, what did America ultimately vote for when it comes to Campaign Finance Reform and, more specifically, unlimited corporate money in our government? The original summary of where candidates stood one year ago is included below, but recall that both Clinton and Sanders vowed to appoint Supreme Court judges that would overturn the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision that allows our Congress to essentially be owned by corporations and billionaires. Recall this article that points to the obstruction Merrick Garland received from Republicans out of fear of retaliation from the Koch brothers. Or, the recent legislation that stripped consumers of internet privacy because internet telecom companies have poured millions of dollars into Congress. Additionally, recall that on the campaign trail Trump advocated for getting big money out of politics.
Since then, Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court and he was ultimately confirmed as the Senate voted to destroy rules in tact throughout history that ensure bipartisan cooperation. In his history on the bench, Gorsuch has supported decisions that corporations are "persons." There is no available evidence that suggests he would be opposed to the Citizens United decision, only the contrary.
So, what did America ultimately vote for? We voted to ensure that the system stays rigged to favor corporations and billionaires with special interests.
Originally posted on Facebook on Tuesday, April 5, 2016:
The election is 31 weeks from today. In preparation for that, I am focusing on an issue a week and sharing where the candidates stand on that issue. For more on my motivation for doing so, read all about it here.
This week’s issue is Campaign Finance Reform. I first started thinking about this issue when I saw this video of Dylan Ratigan’s famous 2011 rant. Specifically, I have kept thinking about the part that starts around 2:10 where they are talking about the money in politics and the lack of moving forward due to the Congress being bought.
Based on my research this past week, these seem to be the two primary sides of the issue that center around the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision. This decision determined that corporations and unions could contribute unlimited funds in essentially advertising for or against a candidate. Out of this decision, Super PAC’s were born. These Political Action Committees cannot directly contribute to a candidate’s campaign, but raise more money than either political party giving them power on behalf of the candidates or issues.
Side #1: This side believes that elections are now bought by the super wealthy and the government is no longer “for the people.” This extends into the belief that elected officials do not represent the people and they are forced to vote on issues based on where their funding comes from or risk losing their seat.
Side #2: Money is free speech and therefore there should not be regulated. People and businesses should be allowed to donate as much as they want regardless of the influence that may come with that money.
Here is where the candidates stand:
Cruz: Believes that Campaign Finance Reform is an assault on free speech (5/2014) and limitations would curtail freedom. (4/2015) He has called campaign finance reform one of the most misunderstood issues in American politics (1/2016).
Clinton: Wants to appoint Supreme Court justices that will overturn the Citizens United decision which she claims allows billionaires to buy elections.
Sanders: Wants to appoint Supreme Court justices that will overturn the Citizens United decision and wants to fight to eliminate Super PAC’s.
Trump: Believes in getting big money out of politics and has called the effects of Super PAC’s “horrible.” He believes that candidates are “beholden” to their PACs which may cause them to disregard public interest. He is currently self-financing his campaign and hasn’t decided if he would accept public or party money in the general election. (1/2016)
Feel free to respectfully supplement any of this information in your comments. As always, I invite you to comment without name-calling or degrading any of the candidates or their supporters.
No comments:
Post a Comment