A Century-Old Principle - Keep Corporate Money Out of Elections

There are worrying signs that there may well be five votes on the Supreme Court to rule that the ban on corporate contributions violates the First Amendment. Full Story »

Posted by Samuel W. Velsor IV - via New York Times (Editorials), New York Times (Opinion)
Tags Help
Subjects: U.S., Politics
Member Tags: Supreme Court, united states politics and government, Editorials
Stats Help
# Diggs: 3 (as of 2009-08-11)
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Samuel W. Velsor IV - Aug 10, 2009 - 8:24 PM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Dwight Rousu - Aug 11, 2009 - 7:40 PM PDT
Dwight Rousu
4.8
by Dwight Rousu - Aug. 11, 2009

The opinion piece points out the biggest attack upon democracy by the Bush corporatist supreme court ever seen, that is unfolding as they attempt to use their 5-4 advantage before it disappears.

If publicly financed elections are instituted, is seems that would counter this unfolding travesty.

The court has gone to extraordinary lengths to hear the case. And there are worrying signs that there may well be five votes to rule that the ban on corporate contributions ... More »

See Full Review » (15 answers)
Samuel W.  Velsor IV
4.2
by Samuel W. Velsor IV - Aug. 11, 2009

I do not think corporations should be able to spend money on elections. That said, they are finding ways to do so anyway, so bite the bullet and allow it with the strongest of regulations, regardless we will know soon.

See Full Review » (11 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

4.5

not enough reviews
from 2 reviews (20% confidence)
Quality
4.4
Information
4.5
Insight
4.5
Style
5.0
Context
4.0
Expertise
3.0
Originality
4.5
Relevance
5.0
Responsibility
4.5
Popularity
4.5
Recommendation
5.0
Credibility
4.5
# Reviews
1.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!