Citizen Jane Explains the Impact of Citizens United

http://www.pfaw.org/CitUAnniv Citizen Jane explains how Citizens United v. FEC reversed more than 100 years of settled law and gave corporations the same First Amendment rights as people.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Citizens United
• People For the American Way
• corporate court
• supreme court
• supreme court decisions
• roberts court
• citizens united v. fec
• john roberts
• citizens united anniversary

[sabymoon]

@Dxmpr72 Unions have been emerging for more than 500 years. First, as guilds, then as groups trying to get better working conditions. Many people have no idea the good they have done all of us.

[Dxmpr72]

@Montfortracing the middle class was born after the war because the u.s. was the only country standing capable of manufacturing. the emergence of unions which demanded fair wages, well funded public education among other things. the free market does not care to grow a middle class. only profits, a corporation only employes people when they absolutely have to and when its within their interest to do so, not out of charity or because they care about the community.

[Montfortracing]

@Fireflygamer Don't forget, it was the free market system that helped grow the middle class to attain greater wealth, just a side note. OK, you know, it's possible that corporations could spend billions of dollars supporting an "honest" candidate, would there be anything wrong with that? Of course not. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that that honest candidate will win the election. What campaign finance reform laws would you pass if you think the current ones are bad?

[Fireflygamer]

@Montfortracin I agree changing the laws so that it protects the middle class and prevents big business for taking advantage of the works is what is important. The problem is who is going to change the laws if they are all in the back pocket of the corporations. Allowing corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on propaganda ads so that the candidates that will support them wins is why the system as it is will not change. For real change to happen we have to have honest people in office

[Montfortracing]

@Fireflygamer Again, I don't think many corporations plan to spend so much money on campaign ads. It's not in their interest, unless a candidate promotes policies that will hurt jobs and businesses. Corporations will spend money in elections because laws that we have in place help them focus more on profits. Trying to change campaign financing is not the issue. Changing the laws is the issue. Also, what's wrong with a rich Hollywood star spending millions promoting a candidate?

[Fireflygamer]

@Montfortracing First I do ignore campaign ads, but a lot of people do and they are effective that's why they spend so much money on them. Second the reforms you speak of are a joke, the system is still bias to the two party system. I would like to know how you plan on getting this change you want with out REAL campaign reform because until then the money is going to be spent to convince the poeple you want to stand up and protest that they should focus on other wedge issues instead.

[Montfortracing]

@Fireflygamer But at the same time you don't have to listen to the half-truths from campaign ads, nor you don't have to believe them. We've had campaign reform for decades and we still don't see as many third party candidates, nor see as many get elected to public office. What needs to happen is a dramatic reduction in the power of government and for every citizen to realize their worth and continuously contact their public officials about corporate influence in lobbying.

[Fireflygamer]

@Montfortracing I agree with everything you said, but its the campaigns that are out to hide the truth and focus our attention on wedge issues. If we do not have campaign reform no 3 party candidate or any truly anti corporate agenda candidate would not get elected in order to challenge lobbying. If you want to limit the corporate influence over the government you need to first limit their influence on who wins elections.

[Montfortracing]

@AerosmithNirvana Of course you made that clear. But you still don't see that groups of people (corporations, PAC's, non-profits, unions, etc.) do have rights. Toaster-ovens are not comprised of people, corporations are comprised of people. Thus is where the corporation get's its rights. Corporations are not like people in that corporations do not have a right to life. People do. But corporations still have rights to protect its assets, property and such from government infringement.

[Montfortracing]

@Fireflygamer "I think both need reform" Lobbying needs more reforming than campaign financing. Yet, it's been campaign financing that's had the most laws passed, and all these laws haven't changed anything. Lobbying is where the corporations get most, if not almost all, of their power, not campaign financing. I think I've mentioned this before, at least in elections you still have a right to vote, whereas in lobbying there is almost nothing you can do stop corporate influence.