[FoRK] Justice Defends Ruling on Finance

David Kammeyer kammeyer at rocketmail.com
Thu Feb 4 21:15:09 PST 2010


Even though I'm against corporate spending on elections, I'm somewhat sympathetic to these free-speech issues.  To me, the issue is bribery.  Most of this type of spending amounts to wink and nod bribery.  It would make sense for politicians to recuse themselves from votes where they have been given money or paid-for endorsements from corporations, and the corporations interests are being voted on, just like judges do.

Of course, suggests the strategy of donating one thirty second TV commerical at 4am on a Sunday three months before the election to all of your political opponents, so they can't vote on issues pertaining to you.

This of course suggests the strategy of donating to judges that might rule against you in jurisdictions you are in.  I wonder if anyone has tried this in Marshall, TX?

-Dave




----- Original Message ----
> From: John Parsons <bullwinklemouth at yahoo.ca>

> Can anyone believe that 150 million/year of corporate funding is not an
> investment that the corporations expect to recoup?


      


More information about the FoRK mailing list