Editorial: Court decision on political spending exceedingly harmful

[ProSense]

Editorial: Court decision on political spending exceedingly harmful
Source: National Catholic Reporter

In the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a court majority of five (all Catholic men) concluded "that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption. That speakers may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that those officials are corrupt. And the appearance of influence or access will not cause the electorate to lose faith in this democracy."

How wrong they were. How wrong they continue to be.

Given the way tens of millions in corporate PAC money, much of it undisclosed, has been pouring into federal elections since Citizens United, few would argue with the conclusion that big money is corrupting our nation's political process.

If money were not effective, if it didn't sway voters through political attack ads, if it did not sow doubts, we would not be seeing so much of it being funneled to political ends. Money has always played a major role in our political system. But what we are witnessing today, in the wake of Citizens United, is unprecedented: billionaires pouring millions into individual campaigns, the wealthiest in our nation capable of threatening candidates and elected officials to do their bidding lest torrents of money be set loose against them -- or withheld from them.

The undeniable message: Serve us or else.

Continue reading here.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=188f3b39-98de-45ef-89f9-5b50202b75e0

[pnwmom]

1. "This is beyond sad. It is tragic."

Except for Sotomayor, the Catholics currently on SCOTUS are a disgrace. As a Catholic, I'm ashamed of them. They're far more representative of right-wing fundamentalism than of the Catholicism I grew up in, or in any of the parishes I've known.