With A Stroke Of His Pen Obama Strikes Back At Citizens United

[babylonsister]

http://www.politicususa.com/en/obama-citizens-united

With A Stroke Of His Pen Obama Strikes Back At Citizens United
April 21, 2011
By Rmuse


A little over a year ago the Supreme Court of the United States made a controversial ruling that says corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited. The case known as Citizens United v Federal Election Commission allows corporations to use their general funds to buy campaign ads that was prohibited under federal law, and opened the door for unlimited contributions by corporations as well as unions. The high court cited the 1st Amendment’s guarantee of the right of free speech, and it was the first time a corporate entity was treated like a person. Detractors of the ruling cried foul and correctly pointed out that, “The Supreme Court has handed lobbyists a new weapon. A lobbyist can now tell any elected official: if you vote wrong, my company, labor union or interest group will spend unlimited sums explicitly advertising against your re-election.” The ruling also opened the door for foreign governments to affect the outcome of United States elections.

snip//

On Wednesday it was reported that President Obama was drafting an executive order that would require companies pursuing federal contracts to disclose political contributions that have been secret under the Citizen’s United ruling. A senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, Hans A. von Spakovsky, lambasted the proposed executive order saying that, “The draft order tries to interfere with the First Amendment rights of contractors.” Mr. von Spakovsky dutifully made all the right-wing, neo-con arguments including bringing Planned Parenthood and unions into the discussion. The draft order did not exempt any entity from disclosure rules and presents a reasonable requirement on contractors seeking government contracts. Several states have similar “pay to play” laws to prevent businesses from using unlimited donations to buy lucrative state contracts from slimy legislators. Thus far the only legislator who has railed against the proposed order was Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). McConnell called the proposal an “outrageous and anti-Democratic abuse of executive branch authority,” and went on to say, “Just last year, the Senate rejected a cynical effort to muzzle critics of this administration and its allies in Congress.”

McConnell is working under the assumption that the draft order is an attempt to restrict free speech, but there is nothing in the order remotely resembling free speech violations. The exact wording of the president’s executive order says, “The Federal Government prohibits federal contractors from making certain contributions during the course of negotiation and performance of a contract.” There is no free speech issue and the order applies to union contractors as well as non-union contractors. There is no special dispensation of muzzles or prohibitions on political support; only certain contributions during negotiations and performance. Republicans must hate the idea of corporations like Halliburton or Koch Industries losing the ability to contribute unlimited money to legislators for special treatment in securing government contracts, especially no-bid contracts like the ones Dick Cheney’s company’s received in Iraq and Afghanistan. In lieu of veracity, McConnell accuses President Obama of muzzling critics and suppressing free speech when in fact, the order will bring increased transparency and accountability to the process of awarding contracts. Republicans made it their goal to increase transparency and accountability in government in the lead up to the midterm elections, so McConnell should be thrilled that President Obama is helping them achieve their goal.

The real objection Republicans and the Heritage Foundation have with the order is that it removes the possibility of corporate money influencing government more than it already does. The Citizens’ United ruling was a gift to Republicans who do the bidding of corporations in exchange for campaign contributions and it became obvious after reports that two Supreme Court Justices attended a secret Koch Industries strategy meeting prior to voting to extend free speech rights to corporations just in time for the 2010 midterm campaigns.

more...

[Nancy Waterman]

1. Can a corporation promise money

and pay up after negotiations? Is this covered in the new policy? I sure hope so. They will find any loophole for their bribes.

[kysrsoze]

2. Wow, this is great! Where have they taken the real Obama, and who is this imposter?

All of a sudden, he's starting to do some things I like.

[msongs]

3. look, it's "campaign obama". remember him? nt

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheEuclideanOne]

28. You are right, he has done a ton of good things, but they have all been for Republicans.

I sure wish we had that Senator Obama guy. Maybe the election will allow us to say hello to him for a little while.

[Richardo]

33. "...they have *all* been for Republicans."

There's a lot of serious thought behind a statement like that.

[Schema Thing]

65. what a ridiculous thing to say.

[TheEuclideanOne]

93. Okay, make your case

And please skip the part of "all". It was not meant to be taken literally. However, I have to say that the Obama that is making decisions today is a far cry from President Obama. Also, since in many people's eyes, he was the perfect candidate. The fact that he is acting very much like "Bush Light" is causing damage for many generations, IMHO. Well you know how I feel, so tell me why you think my viewpoint is so ridiculous.

[FrenchieCat]

10. He has only served 2.4 years thus far......

so if we get "campaign Obama" for the next 1.6 years, that's nearly 50% of being President as Campaign Obama! Not bad....considering that he ain't Jesus and has done a lot of good thus far.

Someone asked in an OP what an Obama Basher was, and how to recognize them.
I say look at repeated patterns and you shall find.

[LynneSin]

23. I'm kinda guessing he tried to play nice and be a team player to the GOP

and finally got pissed off. Let's hope this guy sticks around for the rest of this term and the next.

[BlueCaliDem]

45. That's what I'm thinking, too. The Prez has had enough, and since there's no

satisfying - or calming - the rabid Right no matter what he does, he's thinking, EFF 'em.

He did it their way, and he lost the House, now it's time he does it the Progressive way, and win it back.

[Omnibus]

68. Good point!

Campaign Obama can pull to the left pretty hard and still be centrist. Heck, he could hire Alan Grayson as his campaign manager and still be more moderate than anyone in the Rethug field but Mitt Romney.

[Pisces]

12. Some can always find the negative in a positive situation.

[patrice]

13. It would seem that authentic Liberals consider ALL possibilities. What do you think?

[patrice]

14. i.e. zero-sum thinking is not Liberal, IMO. nt

[Schema Thing]

66. and it's goddamn sure not progressive

given the nature of the word "progress".

[jwirr]

36. If that is it then after the 2012 election is over I want him to start campaigning

for sainthood. That will keep this Obama around.

[The Wielding Truth]

64. Hey. I don't care who does the right thing.

[gtx53550]

78. +100

[thereismore]

4. Subtle yet effective. They will squirm much. nt

[Tippy]

5. K&R

[BIGFOOTSDADDY333]

6. imagine what can get done when he's elected a 2nd term and

doesnt have to worry about re-election

[Sheepshank]

7. Welcome...and a hell yeah!!+

[JuniperLea]

9. Welcome... and hell yeah +1!

[patrice]

11. Well, that & I think he's been working on certain factions this whole time who ARE

authentically interested in seeing functional adaptation in our economics. Have you seen the Progressive Caucus's Tax Reform proposal? Some pretty interesting stuff in it re the bottom layer of those top tax brackets and, then, increasing the rates above that and I have to say it does seem pretty odd economically to tax people making $373K at rates that are based on the same assumptions that you are making about people making billions a year, so that might be an area that we should look at and I'm (really just) guessing that those bottom layers of the top brackets ARE indeed, unlike tho$$$$$$$$$e above them, folks who are authentically interested in really NEW entrepreneurship (which the ones above them are NOT because as they rise they become more and more dependent upon those above them, so any change threatens them all, ergo NO JOBS).

:hi: Welcome to DU Daddy! Enjoy! :hi:

[liberation]

24. Yeah, lack of accountability is such a great motivator

It is not like he has to worry about retirement, speaking engagements and fees, etc, etc.

[ima_sinnic]

38. gee, great talking point

NOT.

He was elected on the basis of certain promises, so what would make him think he wouldn't be REelected if he actually fulfilled those promises?
NOBODY is buying that line of bull -- that he "couldn't do what he wanted" because he was worried about re-election. Because he DIDN'T do what the people elected him to do, he must now campaign again (instead of governing) and hope those who got disgusted might come back around. If he'd rejected the Bush (now Obama) tax cuts to begin with -- do you think he wouldn't be reelected? Or if he'd actually committed to a single-payer health system instead of trading it away behind closed doors? He'd be reelected so fast and with so wide a margin, it'd make your head spin -- but somehow, fear of not being reelected "stopped him" from doing those and many other things. yeah, right :eyes:

[spartan61]

48. I'm with you on this!!!

[woo me with science]

57. ....

:wtf:

What faith you have in the appeal of Democratic values to the electorate.

[fasttense]

81. It seemed to have plenty of appeal to the electorate to vote in FDR for 4 terms.

I could again if the Democrats would be more liberal.

If you take the issues and break them out, the American electorate favors much more liberal and progressive solutions than the corporate media wants you to know.

[woo me with science]

90. Thank you. nt

[jerryster]

84. Ah, but what about the House and the Senate?

First, welcome to the DU!

Retaking the House is going to be an uphill battle. However, the darker cloud on the horizon is the Senate. I read recently that some Democratic insiders consider a Republikoch takeover of the Senate as "inevitable". Isn't that great? I wish someone could identify these defeatists and tell them to STFU. I'll bet one of the states they're conceding is Nevada. After all, we can't possibly elect a Democrat to the Senate in Nevada. Look at what happened to Harry Reid. Oh, wait.

[flamingdem]

15. Really GREAT - Thanks President Obama! nt

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

16. the louder they squeal. the better Obama is doing.

[freshwest]

67. And they've been squealing for nearly 3 years like balloons full of Koch Brothers hot air...

Not a pretty sound, is it?


:dem:


:kick;

[BREMPRO]

17. Obama to corporate shill repukes "Check....your move"...

[GeorgeGist]

18. Promises, promises ...

belated at that.

[patrice]

19. People's assumptions about the use of that word & it's definition are somekind of mass hallucination

, IMO.

What do you think?

:hi:

[Incitatus]

20. K&R

[MasonJar]

21. Wonder if it applies retroactively to Wisconsin and the Koch

Brothers purchase of the Governor Walker. I guess that is a state issue and not federal. However, what a great executive order. I assume most large corporations wish to deal with the government on some level. Finally Obama has done something I truly like. I herald him.

[Scurrilous]

22. K & R

:thumbsup:

[liberation]

25. a good development

finally.

[mountainlion55]

26. actions speak louder than words

In the 2.4-yrs Mr. Obama has had the WH, His actions are totally unimpressive.It is a legitimate statement that he is just Scrub-lite. Healthcare cuts a deal with big pharma at the outset. expands one war. sets up a permanent occupation of Iraq. completes construction of the biggest spy facility in the middle east. It just seems that he has no idea how to use the ,for lack of a better term --The Bully Pulpit. To many things to re-hash, so yeah I think this is just campaining mode. Progressives need to be much more militant or the re-thugs will continue to kick our asses.:hippie:

[AtheistCrusader]

27. This is a good fix, since it does not reverse Citizens United directly.

And plus rec for an article that actually points out "unlimited contributions by corporations as well as unions"
As well as non-profits like the Sierra Club, etc.


This is a good fix. I'm impressed. It will require effort on our part to point out where money is being spent by what company and why, but this makes it solid election ad/issue fodder.

[starroute]

29. So that creep von Spakovsky is still at it

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hans_von_Spakovsky

"Von Spakovsky, a longtime activist in the voting-integrity cause, has emerged as the Administration’s chief operative on voting rights. Before going to Washington, he was a lawyer in private practice and a Republican appointee to the Fulton County Registration and Election Board, which runs elections in Atlanta. He belonged to the Federalist Society, a prominent organization of conservative lawyers, and had also joined the board of advisers of a lesser-known group called the Voting Integrity Project," Jeffrey Toobin wrote in the September 20, 2004, New Yorker.

"In 1997, von Spakovsky wrote an article for the Georgia Public Policy Foundation, a conservative research group, that called for an aggressive campaign to 'purge' the election rolls of felons. Within months of that article’s publication, the V.I.P. helped put von Spakovsky’s idea into action. Phillips met with the company that designed the process for the removal of alleged felons from the voting rolls in Florida, a process that led, notoriously, to the mistaken disenfranchisement of thousands of voters, most of them Democratic, before the 2000 election," Toobin wrote. "During the thirty-six-day recount in Florida, von Spakovsky worked there as a volunteer for the Bush campaign. After the Inauguration, he was hired as an attorney in the Voting Section and was soon promoted to be counsel to the Assistant Attorney General, in what is known as the 'front office' of the Civil Rights Division.


http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4582

5/21/2007

McClatchy Newspaper's excellent Greg Gordon moves the ball forward again on the Bush White House's insider politicization of the DoJ to achieve electoral advantages via gaming of phony "Voter Fraud" claims and the pursuit of voter suppressing Photo ID laws at the polls.

His article covers the inside moves of the Bush-appointed operative Hans von Spakovsky after he was assigned to the DoJ's voting rights unit, and the games he played in the post, including an anonymously published essay on "Voter Fraud" and Voter ID laws; overriding of career civil rights attorney recommendations against a Georgia Voter ID law (while refusing to recuse himself, despite his past service as a Georgia official), a law which was later found by a federal judge to be unconstitutional and akin to a Jim Crow-era poll tax; and attempts to influence the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission (EAC)'s studies on Voter Fraud and the effects of Photo ID at the polls.


http://prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=04&year=2010&base_name=hans_von_spakovsky_back_to_his

Remember Hans von Spakovsky, the former Civil Rights Division attorney with a voter-suppression resume who was at the center of the Bush administration's politicized hiring scandal? For a while he was killing time at Heritage and National Review, attempting to smear the new leadership in the Civil Rights Division for returning to the business of protecting Americans' civil rights rather than just the civil rights of people who vote Republican. Recently, von Spakovsky was appointed to a local election board in Fairfax County, Virgina.

Not Larry Sabato reports that his first action on that board was to try to make it harder for non-English speakers to register to vote.

[progressoid]

30. bigfuckinkickandrec!

[Richardo]

31. Good start. Next, US companies seeking federal contracts must pay federal taxes....

....and have x% of their employees in the US.

[JDPriestly]

32. This is essential. It should be implemented immediately.

Without this law, our government tax revenue is just up for the taking.

Grass-roots conservatives and Tea-Baggers as well as liberals should get behind this regulation.

[Dont call me Shirley]

34. RTFO Mr. Pesident

Now put your muscle behind the "Move to Amend" the constitution stating that corporations are NOT people and money is NOT free speech.

[road2000]

35. Heck, make it all public.

Each of these entities should make public all campaign contributions, whether or not they're seeking a goverment contract.

[polichick]

37. Good on him - he should use his power to counteract the sociopaths as much as possible.

[Historic NY]

39. poor whittle repukes ...........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo

[w4rma]

40. Very good. Now, can we make that a law, soon? (nt)

[JJW]

41. Bribes & Criminals

Only criminals would state bribes are free speeches. It's as insane as corporations being persons.

[Mister Ed]

55. Exactly. This order just says, "no bribes allowed".

“The Federal Government prohibits federal contractors from making certain contributions during the course of negotiation and performance of a contract.”

It's like making a rule that the cops aren't allowed to accept donations to the Police Widows and Orphans Fund from you while they have you pulled over. No straight cop, or honest driver, could possibly be opposed.

[socialist_n_TN]

42. I've been a critic of Obama in the past........

and probably will be again in the future, but credit where credit is due. This would be a good move. I hope he follows through.

He might as well do all he can through signing statements and executive orders. That's the only way a lot of Presidents get anything done. In times of divided government, it's a legitimate way to govern.

[Vattel]

43. excellent work Mr. Prsident

[Major Hogwash]

44. What the ? Really? Just like that?

I'll be durned.

[drm604]

46. Good move

:applause:

[Peacetrain]

47. K&R Excellent

The whole notion of corporations having that kind of anonymous power is frightening

[rpannier]

49. I thought republikkans hated the federal government

Oh, that's right.
When someone else is getting money they hate it
When they're feeding at the trough they love it

[sellitman]

50. That's what I voted for.

About time.

[eridani]

51. Wonderful! Now blow your own horn, PLEASE, Mr President n/t

[bvar22]

52. Kudos to The President!!!

I applaud this move!
:patriot:


But this won't sit well with those who insist that The President has no power on his own,
and can only do what Congress lets him do.
This demonstrates that President Obama is very powerful indeed.




Who will STAND and FIGHT for THIS American Majority?
"By their WORKS you will know them,"

[babylonsister]

54. I'm hoping he's out for bear. Why not? He loses nothing by sounding

sane and using logic. Win/win.

[Ken Burch]

53. I'm glad he did that.

Any idea why he DIDN'T do it DURING the 2010 campaign? Might have made a big difference then.

(not meaning to sound like sour grapes...just wondering...)

[LiberalAndProud]

56. Bribery : free speech. It's all in the semantics, isn't it von Spasky?

Ummm... did I need this? :sarcasm:

[Pholus]

58. Another great move! Perhaps the "15%'ers" are valued after all!

Whatever the motivation, we need lots more like this. I've been especially proud of the president lately!

And, despite what SOME people here may think, I've wanted DESPERATELY to say that for quite a while!

[liberalla]

59. Kick!

Be BOLD, Mr. President!

[BlancheSplanchnik]

60. Yay!!! Kick and Rec--and to hell with you, McConnell!

and to hell with you Mr von Spaz, too. (never heard of him before.... geez these damned neo-con reich wing scumbags..... ugh!!)

Yay, Mr. President!!

[McCamy Taylor]

61. Great idea.

[Jakes Progress]

62. Sign it into effect and it will be nicely done.

How about an executive order the has the justice department investigate the political activities of the members of the Supreme Court. Or just a requirement that they list all their sources of income for their family. Oh. And actually make them do it.

[BrklynLiberal]

63. ANything that f**ks with Citizens United is good.

[Maineman]

69. Excellent article, good move by President Obama

[johnaries]

70. It's such a shame that no matter what good thing he does,

some people will automatically try to turn it against him. "Campaign Obama", indeed! :eyes: If Obama walked on water some people would say "Obama can't swim!"

[Snoutport]

79. yeah...he has a different style which is mellow.

it's hard to accept him being mellow while we are under attack...but then he does some smooth, swift action that kinda achieves what he promised...but with no conflict or face-to-face arguing.

[Arkana]

71. You can do this via executive order?

themoreyouknow.jpg

[grahamhgreen]

76. Does this have legal standing? Can the next prez rescind?

[defendandprotect]

72. Promising ... if it does anything that helps -- applause!!

[Bozita]

73. woo-hoo!

[Avant Guardian]

74. Yay

Bout time!

[highplainsdem]

75. This is great! K&R

[Festivito]

77. That will be overturned the moment Republicans take power again. /nt

[Crowman1979]

80. Well I'm glad to see that Obama has found his balls.

[FreedomRain]

82. Great stuff! but

useless if the press chooses not to investigate or publicize questionable ties

[blackbart99]

83. This thread is full of hope.....thank you.

I try really hard not to be too critical of our Prez....but this is a very hopeful sign.

[bowens43]

85. Although I agree with it

Obama didn't do it because it's the right thing to do, it's self serving. it's about getting re-elected. You can be sure that if corporate money favored Democrats this wouldn't have happened.

[RainDog]

86. good move - glad to see this push back n/t

[jschurchin]

87. It's about fucking time

President Obama started using executive orders. President Bush used them all the time to circumvent a Democratic Congress. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[Exilednight]

88. It's nice, but it still leaves a big fucking loophole that you can drive

a semi filled with hundred dollar bills through.

[BumRushDaShow]

89. K&R

If you can't go over the mountain or through the mountain, then you go around it. :applause:

[highplainsdem]

91. I'm still not finding any news stories (or anything at WhiteHouse.gov) on when the President will

sign this.

I'd think it would be best to sign this and issue a statement on why it's important as quickly as possible, before it gets more attention from the right-wing media.

[Bluenorthwest]

92. Get close to an election and the self interest kicks in

I figured he's stow all that bipartisan romanticism once he could see the gig up for grabs. Suddenly his honest broker good partners in the Republican Party look like rivals, which they always have been. I'm glad he's snapped out of it enough to understand he can not defeat their nominee by calling that nominee courageous and brilliant and saying he's needed at the table for his great ideas. Suddenly he's seeing the Republicans are birthers, not partners. He wasted two years on his indulgent 'post partisan' behavior in a highly partisan environment. If he was really non Partisan, he should not have used a Party machine to get elected. His first two years were like a guy who got picked to play baseball, who got on the field with a football and refused to play an inning of the game he stood up to play. It is a partisan game, and to refuse to play it is just self indulgence. If that is what he wanted, he should have run as an independent, and won on the pure power of his skills, not on Party loyalty and networks.
We picked a general for a battle who hit the ground and announced that the enemy is a friend who should not be fought but instead be pandered to, all the while the enemy is shelling our camp.