Home > Opinion > To Fix the Supreme Court's Citizens United Decision, Copy the Brits

To Fix the Supreme Court's Citizens United Decision, Copy the Brits

Reader Comments
Back to article

Only the epitome of Ant-Democratic rhetoric would suggest reversing two hundred and thirty four years of our history. Our founding fathers revolted against the controls of the East India Company monopoly granted by British Monarchy to dictate corporate policy over the thirteen original colonies.
No way we don't want to go the way of the UK, a sad shadow of its former colonial empire. The UK is still a heavily censored country where their government gives corporations priority over the people.
The last thing we should ever do is copy the British, especially having thrown off the yoke of their corrupt government once before.

James of VA 4:46PM March 16, 2010

I'm with you Muser of NM. I've always thought that a strong religious background is not a positive attribute for anyone sitting on the Supreme Court. We need men and women of character and reason but without the bias engendered by religious indoctrination.
This isn't even an issue touching on the constitutional wall of separation.

jon of IN 11:45AM March 10, 2010

or corporations run your government and run you forever. It's that simple and that serious. When you hear those "independent" political ads (those not sponsored by the actual campaigns) repeated endlessly this fall, you can thank the five Catholic men of the Supreme Court (Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito and Kennedy). They took your little bitty vote and your little bitty money and threw them all out the window, inviting corporations to literally buy the elections---and with no restriction whatever. Blame the Catholic Church. They taught these utter fools to bully and diminish citizens in these ways.

Muser of NM 9:32PM March 09, 2010

We're all legal realists here, right? It's common sense that corporations should not have an important say in our electoral process, and that money has a history of corrupting leaders for...all of human history. I'm sure this outrageous conception of the First Amendment helps Jeff sleep better at night, but more likely it's the deluxe bed-set the corporate contributors to the Center for Competitive Politics made possible.

Janos of NY 6:24PM March 09, 2010

Why should corperations have the right to provide any money to finance campaigns? What good does this provide? I think all donations should be from individuals and capped at $1000 per person. That would shake up politics a bit. For the naysayers out there, how bad would this be? I don't think we could find many people who are less competent than those who are curently governing us.

Village Idiot of NY 2:26PM March 09, 2010

Britain does not have a First Amendment. So, they don't have to worry about burdening their citizens First Amendment rights by requiring companies to run through a regulatory maze before they're allowed to speak out about candidates and policies that could put them out of business. What a terrible idea...
P.S. What about regulations on union speech?

Jeff Patch, Center for Competitive Politics of VA 2:04PM March 09, 2010