Publisher's Page:
How the Supreme Court
just screwed the people of the U.S.

The Presidential election of 2008 brought change that we did not imagine or plan.

The Supreme Court case ruling, "Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission," just changed the national landscape of American politics. The New York Times called the ruling an "earthquake."

Corporations and unions are now considered in the same way, as are individuals in the name of freedom of speech, as expressed in the first amendment of the United States Constitution.

A Little Background
In January of 2008, Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, released HILLARY, a documentary that was critical of then-Senator and candidate for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, Hillary Clinton. Anticipating that HILLARY would be available on cable television through video on-demand within 30 days of primary elections, Citizens United produced television ads to run on broadcast and cable television.

The documentary was not allowed to run. A preliminary injunction was issued and the FCC ruled.

Supreme Court

The Ruling

On January 21, 2010, The Supreme Court decided on "Electioneering Communication," a speech that advocates the election or defeat of a candidate. Thus, from this ruling, corporations have no limit as to what they spend or contribute to a campaign? If so, this ruling changes how voters will see campaigns, political ads and candidates.

A corporation can use ad budgets to support a candidate. The ads might say; "this candidate is brought to you by the ABC Corporation." This is a disaster for American democracy and for the middle and working classes. It is quite challenging, to say the least.

We, the people, have lost.

What It All Means
In this day and age where media perceptions are powerful and dominating, it means that companies like General Motors, Bank of America, and whomever else, will now bring you your president, senators and congressman-without limitations.

So, we move to another level of special interest politics. Who needs a lobbyist, when we now just go directly to the political campaign funds? The debate question will be, "Who is your sponsor?"

Perhaps the Senators will no longer be the "gentleman or lady from the state of..." but instead the "gentleman or the lady from the company of." Big business just got a boost and the people lost.

Campaigning will change. Ad rates will probably increase. The rate on Election Day might be higher than they were the week before. Democracy has shifted; and in this day and age the winner is probably the one with the big bucks. Only the wealthy should step up. What happens to the ordinary guy? People will have to unite and form corporations to compete with corporate and union interest. Former Congressman Bob Edgar says this ruling is the "Super Bowl of bad decisions."

The Supreme Court just granted the right for politicians to be legalized prostitutes. In upcoming elections, you will see ads by corporations and unions run right up to the moment of an election. It can determine, dictate or should I say persuade, the election or the defeat of a candidate. If you think you are sick of political advertising, take a deep breath. You ain't see nothing yet.

Going Forward
This ruling shifts politics. It is now the game for the wealthy. It turns the clock back to yesteryear, when senators and congressmen represented business interests more than the interests of the people.

People must engage in formalized structures to represent their interest. The people are a throwaway and incidental. This is a position of absolute capitalism. So, if you think the corporations and the banks got the bail out and the money didn't trickle down, you can now officially get used to it! This is the way it will be going forward.

I have only one question, what happens to the people?

You might want to get your marching shoes ready to persuade the big spenders to support your interest. That might be the only way to communicate to politicians.