Personal tools

Argument: Unlimited corp spending exists in many states w/o problem

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission 5-4 Majority Opinion of the Court: "26 States do not restrict independent expenditures by for-profit corporations. The Government does not claim that these expenditures have corrupted the political process in those States."

Jon Witold Baran. "Stamped Toward Democracy." Washington Post. January 25, 2010: "There is also no factual basis to predict that there will be a 'stampede' of additional spending. As the court noted, 26 states and the District of Columbia already permit independent corporate and union campaign spending. There have been no stampedes in those states’ elections."

Bill Maurer. "Corporate free speech is not un-American." Seattle Times. February 1, 2010: "The panic felt by incumbents cannot be because they are concerned with corruption. After all, the majority of states do not bar independent expenditures by corporations and unions in campaigns. One of those states is Washington. Somehow we have managed to survive since 1889 with such an "un-American" system in place."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits