Posted on 02/02/2010 11:54:09 AM PST by Justaham
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) joined calls to draft a constitutional amendment to mitigate the impact of a Supreme Court decision that lifted limits on corporate spending in politics.
Kerry on Tuesday became the latest Democratic senator to endorse an amendment to address the decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
"I think we need a constitutional amendment to make it clear once and for all that corporations do not have the same free speech rights as individuals," Kerry said during a committee hearing.
Democrats have been mulling legislation to restrict the scope of the court's ruling, which knocked down large portions of existing campaign finance law.
In a 5-4 decision, the court last month held that corporations should be treated under the law the same way individuals are, a ruling that could open the floodgates to unlimited corporate spending in politics.
Some experts say unions may also be allowed to spend freely.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Free speech for me but not for thee.
Corporations made up of individuals do not have free speech rights; but unions made up of individuals do. Okay, I think I understand it now.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
OK- so Kerry wants to mess with the 1st Amendment. While at it we should correct the judicial misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment too re affirmative action and the anchor baby issue. Oh, and BTW, allow for teaching Christianity in public schools as was the practice since the founding of public schools until struck down by the liberal SC.
A constitutional amendment limiting free speech. Good luck with that, Kerry.
A constitutional amendment limiting free speech. Good luck with that, Kerry.
I find it amusing that these guys walk all over the Constitution in their everyday activities but then return to it when it is in their best interest.
No non-citizens should have any political speach in the form of campaign contributions. Members of corporations, unions and other groups can contribute as individuals. What the corporations wanted was extra political influence. Given that the unions were allowed this privilege, this was a good ruling. May the top bidder win.
The Progressives have fought hard for nearly 100 years to limit corporations, which are one of the few power bases in this country which can effectively oppose total control by the FedGov (states are another). They thought they had it in the bag, and then the Supreme Court goes and upholds the First Amendment for ALL citizens, not just those in the media and unions.
John F'ing Kerry does not want anything to stand in the way of the FedZilla. You little people have made him angry.
Be careful what you wish for libs. The entire argument behind gay marriage is that a group of people have the same rights as 1 person. Killing one kills both.
You do realize that this dilutes the voice of actual people.
When asked a year ago why ACORN and SEIU were going global, I replied that the funneling of foreign money into American political campaigns had to have some cover. ... Andy Stern told U.S. he was going to use the persuasion of power and SEIU has revealed their intention to recruit millions of illegals as memebers so they can vote for democrat progressive fascists.
Unions GOOD,thee and thine BAD
If they do that, they'd best put the same restrictions on the big unions or there will be...trouble. Perhaps even bloodshed.
With very few exceptions, whatever Jon Cary is for I am against.
Isn’t he the guy who served in Vietnam?
Correct me if I’m wrong.
I thought the only way to make an amendment to the constitution was through a constitutional convention,
at which point any part of the constitution could
be brought up for change, or amendment.
A dangerous position to be in.
So I guess the Dems they want to cement the corruption created by McCain-Feingold, since they were the one who were the beneficiaries of it.
Lets close down all PACS, all Unions, all Lobbyists and all monies from some other candidate in another state ,and no monies from political parties, make a law saying only the Constituents in the state in which the candidate runs can give funds.Then limit those funds to $1,000 dollars and then allow the candidate to only spend $5,000 dollars of his own money,See how Kerry likes that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.