Is the Supreme Court poised to destroy the nation s campaign finance laws?
Q. should corporations and unions be treated differently from individuals when it comes to campaign spending? Whatever the court decides could affect decades of campaign finance law and potentially open a floodgate of money for the 2010 midterms. Essentialy buying elections for the Republican Party. Seawolf. Unions have no where near the funds available as corporations do.
Asked by Colbert Nation - Wed Sep 16 10:12:04 2009 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments

A. It will be the biggest shredding of the USA Constitution since the USA Supreme Court ruled in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad that corporations are persons and deserve equal protection rights under the 14th Amendment. As a matter of fact, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad can be used to argue that corporations being persons should be held to limitations in campaign donations that every other person is held to.
Answered by unknown - Wed Sep 16 16:04:31 2009

What do you think about this proposal for campaign finance reform: Anyonamous financial contributions only?
Q. All contributions must be made to a trustee who then moves the funds into the politicians campaign accounts so that the candidates have no way of knowing who donated or how much they donated. It seems like some people would try to claim they donated when they hadn't, others would not be believed when they said they'd donated. Essentially it seems that it would remove the incentive to try to buy politicians and it would help free politicians from owing favors. Your thoughts?
Asked by Ender - Thu May 22 15:27:05 2008 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments

A. Not necessary. The solution to campaign fiance is simple, only people can give money , no groups , corp. , unions etc. If you can't vote then you can't give money. And 100% transparency , a candadate must list everyone that has given them money
Answered by TyranusXX - Thu May 22 15:32:57 2008

What do you think of this campaign finance reform plan?
Q. 1. Everybody who wants to run and can get 1% of the electorate in the race to sign a petition qualifies for public funding. 2. All qualifying candidates get the same level of funding. 3. Self-funding of campaigns is illegal. 4. Private funding of campaigns is illegal. 5. Soft money is illegal - non-profits are banned from mentioning candidates names. M - Matt - if there are 100 million voters in a presidential race, then you need 1% of them, or one million, to sign your petition to qualify for public funds. Noam, the idea that buying politicians is protected speech is a very novel idea. It is against the law to pay people to vote for you - the principle here is the same. Yes, the money would come from taxation, in the name of fair… [cont.]
Asked by Longhaired Freaky Person - Wed Apr 4 15:48:57 2007 - - 8 Answers - 0 Comments

A. Sounds like a good plan, as long as the amount of public funding is LOW. Also, how will you know if someone will get 1% of the electorate? This needs to be addressed, because it may be a way of silencing candidates. --I agree with the guy below me. Everyone who qualifies need s to have access to the funding. However, the biggest problem is, the people who would vote to implement this are politicians, and why would politicians vote to hurt themselves?? --You know what? I have a better idea. No funding at all. Let their stance on the issues get them elected, instead of commercials.
Answered by American Hero - Wed Apr 4 15:52:03 2007

Schumer's - Chutzpah

Wed, 07 Jul 2010 07:28:00 PDT

Free speech hero Bradley A. Smith catches New York's cereal-killing senator with his pants in the usual place: In a fund-raising letter sent ... reason.com.

The Colbert Report - 10/18/2007 - Hail to the Cheese -

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:00:00 PDT

candidate chips colbert '08 colbert nation colbert's presidential campaign colbert08.org corporate money finance financial challenges ... colbertnation.c​om.

Sen. Mike Haridopolos on SB 880 and Transparency [HD]

Tue, 18 May 2010 07:24:04 PDT

Sen. Mike Haridopolos talks about SB 880 and campaign finance transparency after the bill cleared it's first committee stop this week ... facebook.com.