The Senator from Exxon-Mobil?

[FourScore]

The Senator from Exxon-Mobil? As Supreme Court Throws Open the Floodgates to Unlimited Corporate Money in Campaigns, the Time for Real Reform is Now!
by Bob Kerrey

Folks, we have a problem. It's bigger than healthcare, global warming, and the economy because it cuts to the heart of every big issue we face.

The symptoms of this problem are clear:

Instead of doing the nation's business, elected officials are spending a third of their time or more dialing for special interest dollars in never-ending campaigns for reelection. Industry lobbyists are helping to write the very bills in Congress that affect their bottom line, placing private profit ahead of the public good. Billions of taxpayer dollars are going to benefit big contributors through earmarks, subsidies, and special regulations. And that is only the beginning.

The problem is big money in politics.

We've known this all along. Nine in ten Americans believe Congress does not listen to the needs of average citizens. Eight in ten are concerned that big spending by big interests is preventing Congress from meeting the enormous challenges facing our nation today. And just when we thought that corporations had amassed as much political power as any non-human legal entity lacking constitutional protection possibly could, a slim majority of the U.S. Supreme Court today decided otherwise. Led by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court has overturned decades' worth of established precedent limiting corporate money in federal elections in Citizens United v. FEC, thereby opening the floodgates to unlimited corporate spending.

What does this ruling mean? Consider the influence a single corporation like Exxon Mobil could wield in the upcoming energy and climate debate if it is able to not only lobby on Capitol Hill but spend unlimited sums on the election or defeat of candidates. With $85 billion in profits during the 2008 election, Exxon Mobil would have been able to fully fund over 65,000 winning campaigns for U.S. House or outspend every candidate by a factor of 90 to 1. That's a scary proposition when you consider that the health of our planet is at stake. The Supreme Court and the special interests have spoken. It's time for the people to respond. That's where you come in. Believe it or not, there's a solution to this problem already working in seven states and now moving ahead in Congress. The Fair Elections Now Act, introduced by congressional leaders in the Senate and House, would let qualifying candidates combine small citizen donations with matching public funds rather than campaign on corporate money. It's picked up over 120 bipartisan cosponsors who are sick and tired of dialing for special interest dollars, and the program has long been upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court...

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/21-8

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. It could be like stadiums & stuff, So and so holds the comcast seat of ohio

[FourScore]

2. LOL. Humor is good. n/t

[left is right]

3. I hope you have started something here

If every time we mentioned our Senator or Congressman's name we also named his affiliation, how long do you think it would take to thoroughly shame them?

[The_Casual_Observer]

4. They have no shame.

[FourScore]

5. I've always wished elected officials could wear Nascar-like jumpsuits

with all their sponsors' logos sewn on.