General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTo the Roberts Court, money should talk as loudly as possible while ordinary voters can take a walk.
.........there is a particularly cruel irony about the Roberts Courts attack on campaign finance reform in cases like McCutcheon and Citizens United. On the one hand, the Court is making it nearly impossible for Congress or state legislatures to reduce the influence of money in politics, holding restrictions unconstitutional even in cases where they dont suppress speech at all. On the other hand, the Court has been extremely hostile to the voting rights. On the one hand, theyve upheld vote suppression at the state level even when these restrictions are directed at concededly non-existent problems. On the other hand, theyve eviscerated the Voting Rights Act with an opinion that finds no discernible basis in the text of the Constitution or the Courts precedents. To the Roberts Court, money should talk as loudly as possible while ordinary voters can take a walk.
more:
http://prospect.org/article/roberts-court-government-must-be-and-wealthy
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Last edited Wed Apr 2, 2014, 07:01 PM - Edit history (1)
From the OP:
There's a reason why members of Congress in safe seats continue to raise large amounts of money; this money can be used to give to candidates in close races and create political debts that might be repaid in the future.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)New York Daily News:
The Cassandras are wrong, just as they were after the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/democracy-thrive-post-mccutcheon-article-1.1743508
And the billionaire owner makes big bucks buying ink by the barrel and politicians by the bushel.