Just now from DART, I got an ad that stated that Amy Klobuchar wants to end citizens united
Citizens united is the supreme court case that allowed corruption in the US government.
There has always been some corruption in the US Govt. It is not accurate to say that the SCOTUS allowed corruption but it is accurate to say that corruption increased because of the Citizens United ruling. In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled that US corporations were super-citizens of the US, enjoying all of the rights and protections of US citizens but owing none of the responsibilities of a US citizens (military service, voting, census, taxpaying, registering foreign transactions, etc)
In effect, Citizens United made all human citizens second-class citizens, elevating corporations (which secretly means their CEO's, COO's, Presidents, etc 96.4% of whom are white and male) to the first-class citizenship. This allowed the wealthiest white males to give as much money as they liked to their preferred candidates while all other individual citizens, small businesses, unions, private companies, etc. were still restricted as to how much money they could donate.
Studies have shown that the Citizens United ruling gave Republicans an advantage in subsequent elections. One study by political scientists at University of Chicago, Columbia University and the London School of Economics found "that Citizens United increased the GOP's average seat share in the state legislature by five percentage points. That is a large effect—large enough that, were it applied to the past twelve Congresses, partisan control of the House would have switched eight times. In line with a previous study, we also find that the vote share of Republican candidates increased three to four points, on average." A 2016 study in the Journal of Law and Economics found "that Citizens United is associated with an increase in Republicans’ election probabilities in state house races of approximately 4 percentage points overall and 10 or more percentage points in several states. We link these estimates to on-the-ground evidence of significant spending by corporations through channels enabled by Citizens United." According to a 2020 study, the ruling boosted the electoral success of Republican candidates
As the last true Republican on the court, JP Stevens argued in his blistering dissent, the majority addressed questions not raised by the case and changed the case to give themselves an opportunity to rewrite established law. Realizing that Republicans were a dying breed, the Republicans on the court changed the election rules to give CEO's more electoral power than any other group.
"At bottom, the Court's opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense. While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics"
Therefore, most Americans, including all Democratic political candidates, oppose CU as inherently corrupt.
"Opposition to unlimited political spending is neither a liberal nor a conservative issue. In recent surveys, Americans across the political spectrum say there should be limits on the amount of money individuals and corporations can spend on campaigns, that big donors have more influence than others, and that political corruption is the biggest crisis facing the nation. A constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United is backed by 66 percent of Republican voters, "
In 2018 185 Democratic national candidates rejected corporate PAC money as well as 2 Republicans. In 2020, 155 Democrats and no Republicans refused corporate PAC money.
So why am I calling her a hypocrite? Because she is very curropt herself. About $130,000 of the money she raised is from PACs.
She is railing against the corruption and the swamp that she herself is part of. Typical politician.
Typical human, more like. There's plenty of people who think taxes should be simpler or more progressive but who still take advantage of all the tax breaks legally available. There's many soldier who opposed War in Afghanistan but nevertheless went to fight when ordered. Many doctors chastise every patient who is a smoker they meet while concealing a habit themselves. In any Democracy, there's a wide gap between political ideals and political realities.
If Klobachar is "very corrupt" because she took $130,000 in corporate PAC money (I think the actual 2018 number is $1.9 million but about 70% corporate cash) then it necessarily follows that all national Republicans and 90-95% of national Democrats are more corrupt than Klobachar- so why single out one of the least guilty? Why not focus on the worst offenders, all of whom are Republicans? Donald Trump is the most egregious corporate PAC hog at 3046 times more corrupt contributions than Klobachar but you find no fault.....is that not also hypocrisy?
At least Democrats are representing their constituencies popular sentiment while Republicans take the money even though their voters don't want them to.
Lying to your face about being agreeable and then being the exact thing she thinks is wrong with the country.
Klobuchar has voted several times to end Corporate PACs and has so far refused to take any corporate PAC money for her 2024 campaign. This makes her better on the issue than most politicians. Why not focus on one of worse candidates rather than putting your energy into one of the better ones?
What a joke. Don't trust career politicians like Klobuchar.
It's not that you're wrong so much as you are starting at the wrong end of the problem. If you consider taking corporate PAC money legalized bribery, then you should be voting for Democrats who are trying to limit corporate election spending not condemning one of politicians who takes the least corporate money. And certainly not voting for the Republicans who depend on such corruption to prop up their rapidly shrinking minority.
Luke 6: "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
