Forum Post: Campaign donations should NOT be considered free speech
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 25, 2011, 4:07 p.m. EST by Mets
(53)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
If campaign donations are considered free speech, then it would naturally follow that the person with the most money will always have the loudest voice. This is inherently un-democratic. This is common sense, I just don't see how anyone can debate this.
the supremes are supreme the way to get rid of the CU disaster is a constitutional amendment a very difficult - but necessary effort. see http://www.getmoneyout.com/
I would like to see some Campaign Finance Reform, if for no other reason than, candidates spend an inordinate amount of time raising money. However, there is some interesting evidence that PAC money is not that influential. This is a little outdated- from 1995. I would like to see something more current, not sure if the results would differ.
http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittPolicyWatchCongressional1995.pdf
Also, if you are against PAC and special interest money you may want to take a look at Gov. Roemer. http://www.buddyroemer.com/
How about a movie producer which is a corporation, releasing a movie which is highly political, 90 days from an election. Is that film maker using his film as a political donation or is it free speech. Mr Moore did just that and now corporations can give freely to politician's running for office, per our supreme court decision. Mr Moore was the precedent.