Saturday, January 23, 2010

We the Corporations

By a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court on Thursday rolled back restrictions on corporate spending on federal campaigns. The decision could unleash a torrent of corporate-funded attack ads in upcoming elections.

The Supreme Court's ruling is a green light for a new stampede of special interest money in our politics, giving their lobbyists even more power in Washington.

President Obama vows to take action against the Supreme Court's ruling.

"As long as I'm your President, I'll never stop fighting to make sure that the most powerful voice in Washington belongs to you."

Stand with President Obama:

Sign Rep. Grayson's Petition

Sign the Move to Amend motion... See More

Watch the full "Corporation" movie
Full movie:

An answer?

From Newsweek:

What's the remedy? A constitutional amendment is tempting, but tampering with the First Amendment is a bad idea. The best option is Sen. Dick Durbin's ingenious campaign-reform bill. The idea, which already works well in New York City and other localities, is to set up a public-financing system that rewards candidates who attract small donors. House candidates, for example, who raise at least $50,000 in donations of $100 or less would be eligible for $900,000 in public money. The president must move the bill to the center of his agenda and mobilize his 13 million 2008 contributors to pressure Congress to enact it.

From Congressman Alan Grayson (FL-8):

Unlike you and me, corporations don't eat, drink, get married, vote, or bathe. And they never sleep. Which is why they have already launched another attack on our democracy, due to hit ground zero tomorrow, Wednesday, January 27, at 9:30 a.m.

Last week, it was the Citizens United case. That case not only permits unlimited campaign spending by huge multinational corporations, but it also says that any law to curb such spending is a violation of those corporations' "constitutional rights."

Now, it's the SpeechNow case. This new case would extend the newfound "rights" of multinational corporations to billionaires. Yes, the SpeechNow case would give billionaires the "constitutional right" to pollute political campaigns to any degree that they see fit.

We have to fight back. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will hear "arguments" on the SpeechNow case at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow in Washington.

Let's show them what "freedom of speech" really means. We'll speak and, for a change, they'll listen.

Click here to send a message to the court and show your support for real free speech!

You can also call the clerk's office at 202-216-7300.

Over 90,000 of us have signed the petition at Please -- PLEASE -- ask your friends to sign up, and keep watching for ways that we can save democracy.


Alan Grayson
Member of Congress


  1. How does this public money work? Honest question. Because if I don't support a candidate, why would I want my tax money going to him because he had smaller donations? Also, wouldn't a loophole be that instead of making one large donation you could just make many small donations?

  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.