What is citizens united?

[tmfr15]

I have heard people talking about this conservative group. And the Democratic candidates seem determined to dissolve it.

 

Anybody know why?

[Moiraine]

Citizens United was a group that wanted to air an anti Hillary video.

That wasn't the major issue. The major issue is that now because of the ruling on that case, there is no limit on how much a person/corporation can spend on campaigns. I believe the limits before the ruling were in the thousands.

 

I'm of the opinion that people shouldn't be able to use money to influence who gets elected and how politicians vote on policy. I don't see why/how this is a partisan issue.

[Bigred_inSD]

Citizens United was a group that wanted to air an anti Hillary video.

 

That wasn't the major issue. The major issue is that now because of the ruling on that case, there is no limit on how much a person/corporation can spend on campaigns. I believe the limits before the ruling were in the thousands.

 

I'm of the opinion that people shouldn't be able to use money to influence who gets elected and how politicians vote on policy. I don't see why/how this is a partisan issue.

This. I also believe corporations can also collect money from employees and donate it correct? Its becoming more obvious a lot of people vote based off name recognition. Look at Trump, they know him as a billionaire, how many of his supporters know that's he's filed for bankruptcy numerous times.

[knapplc]

It's also probably in the news right now because (the late) Justice Scalia wrote an opinion on the Supreme Court's ruling. Citizens United is one of the more notorious acts of the recent Supreme Court, because it grossly rewrote the definitions of influence and corruption, stating (in simplistic terms) that lobbyist access to persons of influence (lawmakers, presidents, candidates, etc) cannot be easily regulated, so we should dispense with it entirely.

Say a special interest group wants to influence a candidate. They wine & dine the candidate and in so doing gain influence. Citizens United said this isn't undue influence, and specifically that whatever expenditure the lobbyist puts forth is not a bribe. If they discuss business during the lunch, the lunch cannot be considered a bribe.

In theory the money expended is Free Speech. It's where the phrase "Corporations are people" came from, a line which Mitt Romney echoed in his campaign, with disastrous consequences.

Citizens United is widely believed to have thrown open the door for corruption in American politics. Unless someone can conclusively prove quid pro quo influence, whatever happens isn't corruption. It was a huge win for anyone running for office, a huge loss for voters.

[BigRedBuster]

As someone who wishes money were taken out of politics, I'm obviously not happy with what has happened in American politics since this decision.

 

However, saying that, to what extent do you go with regulating what people can spend and do to help get someone elected?

 

Can a corporation send a flyer in pay checks to their employees?

Can a union send mailings for a candidate to their members?

Can a corporation donate money to a campaign

 

Can a union do the same thing?

 

Can Planned Parenthood run an ad showing their support for a Democrat because they support funding for them?

 

Can a church run an ad against funding for Planned Parenthood expressing what candidates believe the same way?

 

Can the Koch brothers pay for an ad to run talking about what a horrible person Hillary is?

If you are against that, are you against George Soros doing the same thing against Cruz, Trump or Rubio?

 

You see, the problem with this "problem" is, everyone wants to greatly regulate the other side but...."hey.....don't touch the people who promote and support my beliefs. After all, they are being good Americans and informing us of the evil ways of the other side."

 

There have been many decisions by the Supreme Court that have not been popular. However, at what point is this a free speech issue and where does it stop being a free speech issue?

 

Where I FIRMLY believe this needs to be addressed is that prosecution or law suits need to happen often when an ad is put out that is a complete fabrication or lie. If that happens often enough, the crap would slow way down.

[Bigred_inSD]

Corporations are people. They actually aren't, but they run America anyway.

[Saunders]

Hillary v Trump would be the dumpster fire this ruling deserved.