Thom Hartmann: Did the Supreme Court just kill public financing of elections?

[thomhartmann]

Run time: 07:38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVHme7b1_7M   Posted on YouTube: June 29, 2011 By YouTube Member: TheBigPictureRT Views on YouTube: 66   Posted on DU: June 29, 2011 By DU Member: thomhartmann Views on DU: 758

 
Sean Parnell, President-Center for Competitive Politics Vs. Thom Hartmann. Another day - another Supreme Court decision in favor of big money in our politics. Yesterday - in another 5-4 ruling - the right-wing of the Supreme Court struck down an Arizona law that provides public financing of elections. The law was intended to level the playing field between people with huge fortunes and rich friends - and just average folks running for office - by supplying matching public funds to candidates who are being outspent by private money. The law made sure that electoral politics in Arizona wasn’t a “whoever has the most money wins” sort of game. But the high court ruled that any attempt by the government to “equalize electoral opportunities” - as in make sure both candidates are on a level playing field financially - is unconstitutional. But what IS constitutional to the Conservative Supreme Court nowadays? The corporate takeover of our democracy - as was decided last year in the Citizens United case. So how does this ruling make sense - isn't fewer - and not more - corruptive corporate dollars in our elections a good thing? And did the Supreme Court just kill public financing of elections?

The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann on RT TV & FSTV "live" 9pm and 11pm check
www.thomhartmann.com/tv for local listings

[Poll_Blind]

1. Hartmann knows his stuff, that's for sure.

Very interesting to watch!

PB

[FiveGoodMen]

2. And when Bush put two of those five on the bench...

...could any of our Democratic senators even put up a fight?

[rhett o rick]

3. r & k