Some very sensible reforms are:
If you cannot become eligible to vote, you cannot donate to any campaign.
All donations must be reported online with 24 hours.
If you cannot become eligible to vote, you cannot donate to any campaign.
All donations must be reported online with 24 hours.
I have the right to free speech and and I can use my possessions to exercise this right. I can criticize Obama verbally, in a document on my computer or I can publish that document to my website. Why can't I use my corporation to pursue the same goal?
I also have the right to vote. I don't get a second vote for my computer, however. Similarly, my corporation doesn't give me another vote.
Corporations don't have free speech. Their owners have free speech, and they can use their corporation to exercise those free speech rights.
Five guys sit in a room and decide to use their poker profits to run a political commercial. It's all fine.
Same five guys sit in a board room and vote to use company money to run a political commercial. It's all bad.
I must be missing something.
Some history: Back in 2000, a bunch of guys decided to use their money to run political commercials. These commercials persuaded people vote against McCain in the Republican primary. 2 years later, McCain pushes a law which tries to prevent this.
The goal of political speech limitations is to prevent anyone besides certain elites (and not other elites) from affecting an election. Since spending money is necessary to get a message out, they try to restrict spending money on political speech.
With any luck this ruling will eventually result in an environment where people like the above who are merely expressing their dislike of powerful politicians will find it easy to follow a straightforward set of disclosure rules (and only that) and therefore the establishment won't be able to then ruin their lives.
I'm with you on reporting donations. Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.