Leahy Comments On The Citizen's United Supreme Court Decision

[golden79]

This is why looking at precedent is so important. And what was previously in place was crucial.

[golden79]

This judgement was a step in the wrong direction. Imagine if an entity like Comcast or Time/Warner wanted people in office. Not only are they in control of a vast sum of money, but also many of the vast outlets of information. Defamation may not be an issue anymore--Candidates may eventually be denied advertising.

[golden79]

Imagine if a company like Comcast or Time/Warner wanted to get people in office. They have a vast amount of money, not to mention a great deal of control on the information we get. That is were this ruling becomes dangerous. To allow a corporation some of the rights of a person opens floodgates to allow the rest. Defamation may not even come into play because candidates may at some point be denied advertising.

[yakyakyak69]

The Radical Progressive Left has their panties in a knot because THEIR corporate media just LOST its monopoly on political speech.

Finally ALL corporations (not just MSNBC, CNBC, FOX, PBS, ABC, NBC) have equal access to air time!

As long as the advertising is correct and not a lie, then we can NEVER have too much information!

BTW, there are all kinds of laws on the books to prevent Defamation which is any wrongful injury to the reputation of a person or entity.

[underyourskindvd]

its a step into more trouble.

[Avidsh21]

Thank you Senator!!

This decision defies logic and threatens the foundation of democracy by drowning out individuals - AND AMERICANS - the Court did not distinguish between American and foreign corporations!!

Campaign funding could be bought by China, Saudi Arabia - you name it - simply by creating a corporation.

IMPEACH THE JUSTICES WHO VOTED YES

[dullsvillain]

Good for you sir!

If you want to sign protest petitions against the ruling see the links connected to my video post

" SIGN A PETITION "NO CORPORATE ELECTIONEERING !"

[ggammel]

Is he drunk? What's in the glass?

[ReliableInsider]

The U.S. Supreme Court is sending Americans a very powerful message:

If you ever elect another Republican President, you're all doomed and, in fact, it may already be too late.

[WunderMaus]

The SCOTUS legalized Fascism in America. FASCISM! What are We, the People of the United States of America going to do about it?

[frwgt350net]

Leahy will be voted out soon...............

[substanti8]

Money is a surrogate for political speech because the medium for that speech is primarily costly television advertising. Candidates quickly learn that in an individualistic society like ours, the only way to speak to a sufficient number of voters is to spend millions of dollars on broadcast advertising.

Congress and the FCC have failed -- horribly failed -- to ensure that the publicly owned electromagnetic broadcast spectrum is used for the public interest. Instead, this public resource ...

[substanti8]

... is leased for a song to giant media corporations -- who use it for private profit.

It is downright bizarre that broadcaster middlemen hold our democracy hostage for the benefit of their stockholders. When the price of a soapbox requires a bank loan, only the rich get to speak.

The plague on democracy will not abate as long as we argue about regulating the SUPPLY of campaign money, rather than the DEMAND for it. The demand would be severely reduced if the FCC were to require ...

[substanti8]

... all broadcasters to provide FREE political advertising to candidates who meet qualifications set by the FCC.

The root of this problem is the failure to regulate the communications industry for the public interest.

Attempts have been made in Congress to pass legislation that would mandate free political advertising, or at least take steps toward that goal. For example, in 2003, there was Senate Bill 1497 -- the "Our Democracy, Our Airwaves Act":

campaignlegalcenter. org/FCC-198.html

[substanti8]

(continued)

But the bill had very few sponsors, and it died in committee:

govtrack. us/congress/bill.xpd? bill=s108-1497

So why didn't Senator Leahy sponsor the legislation? If the Senator is so concerned about the pernicious influence of corporate money on our democratic process, doesn't he understand where that money goes? What has he done to restore our airwaves for the public interest??

[TrollBuster9090]

Superb speech.

Please pass legislation requiring:

1. Corporations to obtain consent from their shareholders before spending money on political efforts.

2. Any corporations participating in the political process must either be owned by Americans, or their campaign finances must be pro-rated to the percentage of American share holders.

3. Transparency so that corporate money can't be laundered through PACs to disguise its source.

[classicallady]

We need more Senators like Leahy, Grayson, rep. Weiner, Bernie Saunders and other real great men with the clear sense of dignity and morality

[thrawn42]

EVERYONE should be troubled by this Supreme Court decision. It is quite possibly, historically and ethically, more important than any of the politically heated legislative issues at hand.