This isn't a "Party R vs. Party D" issue. This has become structural.
For the top 0.000042%, this isn't a bug, it's a feature.
For the Court of Johnny Robers and the Supremes, this isn't a bug, it's a feature. I would hope that all five of the justices who rule that way aren't venal tools of the American Oligarchy, that most of them are blinded by their political ideology. But it matters not, the effect is the same.
We have to change things. For that we either need a Supreme Court that has at least one foot in the real world or we have to change the Constitution (or do what FDR threatened to do). I doubt if a President Warren or a President Paul would be able to fix it. The culture of "money talks" now is entrenched too deeply.
But if we can't fix it, I see nothing good coming out of this mess.
The Price is WRONG.
6 minutes ago
5 comments:
The thing that puzzles me is how many times I see an argument that boils down to "Big business has taken over government, so we need more government". The idea that we can micro-regulate our way to less business influence is as absurd--most regulation winds up helpful to big business, keeping newly created business in line. Paypal slid in under the radar, probably violating a few laws on the way to dominance...but now that they are established can handle quite a bit more regulation. Paypal slid in under the radar, probably violating several banking laws, despite offering a very useful service. Since Paypal, more regulations have been enacted to "protect" us from similar non-banking financial companies..and incidentally making it that much harder for a Paypal competitor to succeed...and that much easier for Paypal to charge non-competitive rates.
What does Paypal have to do with reversing the pernicious notion of the current Supreme Court that money is speech?
"what they do in Washington, they just takes care of Number One. And Number One ain't you - you ain't even number two." -FZ
I kind of think capitalism has to fall, for anything other than a spectacularly evil ending of the country.
Try to imagine the Roman Empire holding on much longer, because it had nuclear weapons to keep the barbarians away.
Was a comment on the more general situation of more regulation as the solution to every problem. At least some of the proposed "money as speech" restrictions would make 2 people getting together to spend $20 to support a candidate subject to reporting regulations and penalties if they get the paperwork wrong--amplifying the advantages of incumbents. There is almost no chance Big Business won't be able to steer the details of the final law into something they can live with and benefit from, while looking like reform on paper.
Post a Comment