Democracy has suffered another near fatal blow:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/02/mccutcheon-v-fec_n_5076518.html

The Supreme Court struck down limits Wednesday in federal law on the overall campaign contributions the biggest individual donors may make to candidates, political parties and political action committees.

The justices said in a 5-4 vote that Americans have a right to give the legal maximum to candidates for Congress and president, as well as to parties and PACs, without worrying that they will violate the law when they bump up against a limit on all contributions, set at $123,200 for 2013 and 2014. That includes a separate $48,600 cap on contributions to candidates.

4/2/2014 1:04:11 PM

Well, if billionaires and businesses can't buy elections, then how are we supposed to operate as a county?

4/2/2014 1:15:26 PM

not a fan of the decision

but is it really gonna change much compared to the current? Rich folks just launder the money they want to give through various shell organizations if they are bumping against any limits.


The stage is set (unless there is a major shakeup in SCOTUS) for absolutely no spending limits. The best we can hope for at this point is FULL DISCLOSURE of all contributors to any campaign. That's where people wary of money in politics should be fighting IMO.

4/2/2014 1:42:44 PM

The justices today highly resolve that government of the wealthy, by the wealthy, for the wealthy, shall not perish from the earth.

4/2/2014 1:44:34 PM

4/2/2014 2:38:36 PM

Quote :

" The best we can hope for at this point is FULL DISCLOSURE of all contributors to any campaign"

We needs this regardless of any other laws.

4/2/2014 2:56:12 PM

this ruling is correct as limits on speech are unconstitutional and money is considered speech.

Quote :

" but is it really gonna change much compared to the current? Rich folks just launder the money they want to give through various shell organizations if they are bumping against any limits. The stage is set (unless there is a major shakeup in SCOTUS) for absolutely no spending limits. The best we can hope for at this point is FULL DISCLOSURE of all contributors to any campaign. That's where people wary of money in politics should be fighting IMO. "

I mostly agree. The current limits were mostly useless cause anyone with the means to give those amounts is gonna find a way to do it. The limits are effectively stupid and only really hurt "honest" donors.

Full disclosure would be nice, but ultimately useless I think. No one really cares where the money is coming from. If you cant create a serious scandal around the government spying on everyone how the hell are you gonna make people care about where campaign funds came from?

Even if you don't like the idea of all this money in politics (meaning your some super naïve idealist), idk how you could support the limits specified in the law that was just struck down. It effectively limited campaign contributions to the most popular of the mainstream candidates by forcing donors to pick who they think could best succeed overall, instead of being able to support more "fringe" candidates who might get knocked out in the primaries like all campaign finance reform efforts, it was poorly conceived.

Like idk how you'd even attempt to limit campaign finance in a way that makes sense. There probably isn't a way to do it.

4/2/2014 4:10:42 PM

Money isn't speech, its speech amplification.

4/2/2014 4:20:16 PM

which is still speech. lots of things amplify speech and we don't consider banning them. the largest speech amplifiers are political parties and lol if you think we're ever gonna be able to get rid of them.

4/2/2014 4:29:39 PM

I'm not suggesting we ban money in politics or political parties. I'm only suggesting that we SHOULD be able to regulate them.

4/2/2014 4:38:12 PM

I don't think theres any reasonable way to do it though. the current limits are totally ignored and completely arbitrary. the limits that just got shutdown were even effectively harmful to candidate diversity.

why is it ok to limit money but not the power of political parties? what about people who own news organizations or other media outlets. they aren't directly paying money to a campaign, but they can surely alter opinions and have control over part of the national conversation.

and if your goal is making everyones voice equal, which is silly by itself, none of these campaign finance reform laws even come remotely close. until you're talking about $5 limits instead of tens of thousands of dollars, you're still wasting your time.

[Edited on April 2, 2014 at 4:58 PM. Reason : a]

4/2/2014 4:58:25 PM

2016 will be $5 billion +

4/2/2014 4:59:25 PM

^^Our previous system wasn't perfect, but I think it was superior to the direction we are headed (Unless we develop much better disclosure laws)

We don't limit media organizations, like we should be doing to money or political parties, because the first amendment explicitly states that the freedom of the press shall not be infringed.

4/2/2014 5:11:23 PM

Let's just redistribute the money instead

4/2/2014 5:41:33 PM

the new right-wing principle is "one dollar one vote"

4/2/2014 8:39:41 PM

Quote :

"^^Our previous system wasn't perfect, but I think it was superior to the direction we are headed (Unless we develop much better disclosure laws) We don't limit media organizations, like we should be doing to money or political parties, because the first amendment explicitly states that the freedom of the press shall not be infringed."

it wasn't superior at all. the previous limits were meaningless and harmful to democracy. they did absolutely nothing whatsoever to empower the people, unless you think everyone can donate several thousand dollars to their favorite party.

why are media organizations unique? the only ones with any market share are the ones that make the most money. How is that money special but money from other individuals and groups is not? Money is speech. If it wasn't then we'd ban all political contributions entirely.

[Edited on April 2, 2014 at 8:54 PM. Reason : i]

4/2/2014 8:54:20 PM