Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Galraedia

(5,022 posts)
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 09:18 PM Jan 2012

Republican National Committee Files Brief Seeking To Allow Corporate Funding Of Campaigns

One of the few remaining limits on corporations’ power to buy and sell American elections is that corporations are not allowed to give money directly to federal candidates. Citizens United frees them to spend billions of dollars running ads or otherwise trying to change the result of an election to suit their interests, but corporations cutting checks directly to candidates or to political committees such as the Republican National Committee is one of the few things the Supreme Court’s conservatives have not yet imposed upon the country.

If the RNC gets its way, however, that will soon change. In a brief filed yesterday in the Fourth Circuit, the RNC argues that the federal ban on corporate donations is unconstitutional in large part because it applies across the board to all corporations:

Most corporations are not large entities waiting to flood the political system with contributions to curry influence. Most corporations are small businesses. As the Court noted in Citizens United, “more than 75% of corporations whose income is taxed under federal law have less than $1 million in receipts per year,” while “96% of the 3 million businesses that belong to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have fewer than 100 employees.” While the concept of corporate contributions evokes images of organizations like Exxon or Halliburton, with large numbers of shareholders and large corporate treasuries, the reality is that most corporations in the United States are small businesses more akin to a neighborhood store. Yet § 441b does not distinguish between these different types of entities; under § 441b, a corporation is a corporation. As such, it is over-inclusive.

This attempt to make mom and pop stores — as opposed to Halliburton — the face of the RNC’s argument is clever, but it does not change the implications of their argument. If a court accepted the RNC’s argument, it would have to strike down the entire federal ban on corporate donations — leaving Exxon and Halliburton free to give money to any candidate they’d like. Congress might be able to restore part of this ban by enacting legislation. But, of course, that would require any such bill disadvantaging corporations to survive John Boehner’s House and Mitch McConnell’s filibuster.

Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/01/11/402358/republican-national-committee-files-brief-seeking-to-allow-corporate-funding-of-campaigns/

If corporations are people then I demand seeing a birth certificate!

20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Republican National Committee Files Brief Seeking To Allow Corporate Funding Of Campaigns (Original Post) Galraedia Jan 2012 OP
I'll believe corporations are people when muntrv Jan 2012 #1
If corporations are people then polygamy and slave-owning should be legal arcane1 Jan 2012 #4
What do you do? Saving Hawaii Jan 2012 #11
Who else will fund the Republican Party? Old and In the Way Jan 2012 #2
Here we go LiberalEsto Jan 2012 #3
Ron Paul, sponsored by Sandoz Pharmaceuticals jberryhill Jan 2012 #6
good ones LiberalEsto Jan 2012 #7
Oh GOODIE!.. Calling Stephen Colbert! annabanana Jan 2012 #5
Colbert just gave his Super PAC away to John Stewart, in light of him thinking of running. nt MACARD Jan 2012 #19
what a bunch of weasels SixthSense Jan 2012 #8
Why do corporations get more rights then people ThomThom Jan 2012 #9
They just want to make it more open and transparent. lpbk2713 Jan 2012 #10
sign the pledge PowerToThePeople Jan 2012 #12
So if a corporation is viewed as one person, WHEN CRABS ROAR Jan 2012 #13
Corporations are people so. bl968 Jan 2012 #14
then unions could do the same thing madrchsod Jan 2012 #15
Could their timing be worse? mwb970 Jan 2012 #16
trying to buy votes MACARD Jan 2012 #20
so is a "church" a person? Locrian Jan 2012 #17
Russian Mafia? Latin-American drug cartels? pbrower2a Jan 2012 #18
 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
4. If corporations are people then polygamy and slave-owning should be legal
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 09:33 PM
Jan 2012

We'll just call it "mergers and acquisitions"

Saving Hawaii

(441 posts)
11. What do you do?
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 01:22 AM
Jan 2012

I'm into, uh, well, murders and executions mostly.

Do you like it?

Well, it depends. Why?

Well, most guys I know who are in Mergers and Acquisitions really don't like it.

Old and In the Way

(37,540 posts)
2. Who else will fund the Republican Party?
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 09:24 PM
Jan 2012

They seem to be having a real problem fund raising from individuals. They need their sponsors to bail them out. In turn, Republicans will be a reliable Party to further their interests in Congress.

 

LiberalEsto

(22,845 posts)
3. Here we go
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 09:27 PM
Jan 2012

Mitt Romney, brought to you by Bank of America

Rick Perry, brought to you by ExxonMobil

Ron Paul, sponsored by (your corporation here)

Rick Santorum...

Jon Huntsman...

Newt Gingrich...

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
6. Ron Paul, sponsored by Sandoz Pharmaceuticals
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 09:49 PM
Jan 2012

Rick Santorum, sponsored by K-Y

Jon Huntsman, sponsored by Lunestra

Newt Gingrich, sponsored by Newtco, a wholly owned division of Newt LLC, in a limited partnership with Tiffany's.
 

SixthSense

(829 posts)
8. what a bunch of weasels
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 10:09 PM
Jan 2012
the reality is that most corporations in the United States are small businesses more akin to a neighborhood store.


That may be true, but the vast majority of actual donations are coming from large enterprises and specifically those large enterprises with an interest in using the government as a means of making money, in lieu of actual production.

ThomThom

(1,486 posts)
9. Why do corporations get more rights then people
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 01:10 AM
Jan 2012

there are limits to how much people can donate to campaigns and if corporations are people why don't they have the same limits or why weren't all limits removed across the board.
Of course I don't believe corporations are people. I also think campaigns should be publicly financed and limited to a very brief time period.

lpbk2713

(42,753 posts)
10. They just want to make it more open and transparent.
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 01:21 AM
Jan 2012



The GOP has always been the party of and for the fat cats.


WHEN CRABS ROAR

(3,813 posts)
13. So if a corporation is viewed as one person,
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 02:43 AM
Jan 2012

you limit them, all of them, to a one time donation, of lets say one thousand dollars per candidate and the same for an individual making a donation to a candidate.

Fair and equal.

bl968

(360 posts)
14. Corporations are people so.
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 06:20 AM
Jan 2012

Limit corporations to being allowed to donate no more than the a human person is allowed to donate to a candidate. While we are at it put the same limits on political parties and pacs. So no more than $2,500 per candidate.

madrchsod

(58,162 posts)
15. then unions could do the same thing
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 08:27 AM
Jan 2012

although unions do not have the same amount of cash corporations do it would allow them to do the same. unions have one big advantage is the amount of people they can use during a political campaign.

mwb970

(11,358 posts)
16. Could their timing be worse?
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 08:39 AM
Jan 2012

There is a new awareness of income inequality in America and the corrupting influence of big money on our politics. We are about to experience an American Spring. And now, here come the republicans, waving their "We are the 1%" flags and trying to get even MORE money into politics.

Wrong message, wrong time. For once, the propensity of conservatives to be wrong about everything is actually going to work in America's favor as we try to fight the cancer of big-money right-wingery that threatens our democracy.

MACARD

(105 posts)
20. trying to buy votes
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 01:44 AM
Jan 2012

if Repubs couldn't buy votes they wouldn't have any offices, but they do a go for the glimmer of hope in their watchers eyes that their followers may at one point bask in the supposed glory of being in the 1% newsflash the 1% club is invitation only and invitations only go to the children of current members. If you are not currently basking in the glory of in a portion of that 40% of wealth, you never will. Democrats are not the only ones who use hope its just Democrats instill hope while trying to deliver on that hope.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Republican National Commi...