Sky's the limit...Court strikes down overall political donation limit

It's nice to know that guys like the Koch Brothers can now buy elections that much easier... You do have to wonder why this was allowed and what the ramifications of this will be? It's really scary when we see changes like this, and knowing that our US Govt's actions are questionable at best, you can now assume that we will now have the best Govt. that money can buy!

Washington (CNN) - In another blow to federal election laws, the Supreme Court on Wednesday eliminated limits on the total amount people can donate to various political campaigns in a single election season. However, the court left intact the current $5,200 limit on how much an individual can give to any single candidate.

At issue is whether those regulations in the Federal Election Campaign Act violate the First Amendment rights of contributors.

The divided 5-4 ruling could have an immediate impact on November's congressional midterm elections, and add another layer of high-stakes spending in the crowded political arena.

"We conclude that the aggregate limits on contributions do not further the only governmental interest this court accepted as legitimate" said Chief Justice John Roberts, referring to a 1976 precedential ruling.

"They instead intrude without justification on a citizen's ability to express the most fundamental First Amendment activities."

Roberts was supported by his four more conservative colleagues.

In dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer said the majority opinion will have the effect of creating "huge loopholes in the law; and that undermines, perhaps devastates, what remains of campaign finance reform."

The ruling leaves in place current donor limits to individual candidates, and donor disclosure requirements by candidates, political parties, and political action committees.

CNN

reply to post by jhn7537


I think what you meant to say is UNIONS are free to buy elections.

Why are the Koch brothers always mentioned? They aren't even close to being a top political donor.

www.americanthinker.com...

www.opensecrets.org...

None of the Top 10 Biggest Political Donors are Republican

reply to post by jjkenobi


I used the Koch brothers in my OP, because most all ATS members know who they are. Obviously you can plug in a whole bunch of names to this list and I agree that unions too could be a force. I didn't use Koch brothers for any specific attack at them, but only because they are so recognizable.

jjkenobi
reply to post by jhn7537

 

I think what you meant to say is UNIONS are free to buy elections.

Why are the Koch brothers always mentioned? They aren't even close to being a top political donor.

www.americanthinker.com...

www.opensecrets.org...

None of the Top 10 Biggest Political Donors are Republican

edit on 2-4-2014 by jjkenobi because: (no reason given)

You are so right!



I applaud this decision though the remaining individual limit is an affront to free speech.

reply to post by jjkenobi


The unions represent whole groups of people, thousands. Who do the Koch Brothers represent?

Anyway, I blame the american voter for being lazy, turn off the tv ads, and go find out for yourself who the candidate is.

Disregard

No, what's really scary is watching OUR own gov't try to manipulate the Free men and women of this country.

If you subscribe to the beleif that more money, rather than better ideas etc, will win an election, isn't it over already then?

Someone can have all the money in the world and still be an a@@. Bet they wouldn't get elected.


No, after the grand fleecing the US is getting from Obama policies and how he was not vested in the least has made most of the America people wise.

"Never Again" will we fall for a False God..... will be the rallying cry of the ones who had been fooled by Obama.

MOMof3
reply to post by jjkenobi

 

The unions represent whole groups of people, thousands. Who do the Koch Brothers represent?

Anyway, I blame the american voter for being lazy, turn off the tv ads, and go find out for yourself who the candidate is.

They represent "whole groups of people, thousands" too.

In fact maybe some of the same people.

People who have small investments and people who have vested interests in pension and retirement plans that invest heavily in the same investments that the "Koch brothers" do.

reply to post by xuenchen


"People who have small investments and people who have vested interests in pension and retirement plans that invest heavily in the same investments that the "Koch brothers" do." - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Oh, the money people.

Unions=workers
Kochs=retirements

Two polar opposites.

reply to post by jhn7537


Koch brothers are you kidding me this is bad for everyone....I don't like the idea that corporations in general make contributions to these goons in office let alone the Koch brothers..I don't like the fact that pharmaceutical companies, law firms, unions make contributions to people in office...it's all bad

reply to post by chrismarco


What's scared me for a while now is wondering how the political leaders and judges HONESTLY feel that we are moving in the 'right' direction when we see things like this happen.. I don't see how they can see this is a good thing at all.

Seems like we going bass ackwards on both this issue and also the issue of term limits, folks. We might be seriously screwed. Either that or they are seriously afraid their moneypot is going to dry up and are being proactive in fighting it. Hope it's the latter.

I think if we're fair to look? Sites like Open Secrets show the money, who it came from, who it went to and broken down to near absurd levels of detail on the recent history of elections as well as candidates.

This gets painted as a super partisan issue, like everything else. (Ordering lunch in Washington must be a red/blue fight in some offices, for how everything else seems to be)

I would love to see BOTH Corporations AND Unions cut out of the system for money given. Those two and what falls in line besides them. Equally, and across the spectrum.

Citizens United and what this one may have done wouldn't have removed anything for corruption and money. It simply would have insured ONE SIDE of that had been largely negated, while the other side had free reign to plow on.

Cut 'em both...or we have the equal treatment clause that isn't just a value, but a basis of law.

Let them have all the money they want.

Let unions, PAC's, Lobbyists, spend all their money.

Let them put into office whomever they want.

There comes a time when it won't matter who is in office.
There comes a time when it doesn't matter what laws they write.

There comes a time when we will exercise our rights NOT to listen anymore.

Look on the bright side. For once, at least they're being (somewhat) honest about it. We've known for ages that corporate cash controls the political scene. They're just not being coy about it anymore because they know it doesn't matter--no one will do a damn thing about it.

Gotta look for the diamond in the rough, that's what I always say.