The Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision has unleashed a campaign money system dominated by billions in spending controlled by tiny fraction of voters. Central to its ruling, the court conjured from thin air and against massive evidence to the contrary its assertion as “fact” that these concentrated billions have not corrupted American politics:

“Independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption … The fact that speakers may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that these officials are corrupt … The appearance of influence or access … will not cause the electorate to lose faith in our democracy.”

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.