9 replies to this topic

[jugoso]

In a landslide victory Tuesday night, Montana voters approved an initiative stating "that corporations are not entitled to constitutional rights because they are not human beings" -- corporations are not people.
The initiative directly challenges the now infamous Citizens United  decision, which allows corporations to contribute unlimited amounts of money for campaign groups know as super PACS and 'shadow money' organizations.
Initiative 166 will win roughly 75 percent to 25 percent, according to the likely, but not yet final, results, Montana's Billings Gazette reports.
The initiative states:

"Ballot initiative I-166 establishes a state policy that corporations are not entitled to constitutional rights because they are not human beings, and charges Montana elected and appointed officials, state and federal, to implement that policy. With this policy, the people of Montana establish that there should be a level playing field in campaign spending, in part by prohibiting corporate campaign contributions and expenditures and by limiting political spending in elections..."

http://www.commondre...ne/2012/11/07-0

[Wickian]

Now if only this can happen in every state.

[supervike]

How could anyone really vote against that?

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

Win!

[Hilander]

I wish they would get rid of Citizens United, we don't need corporations running the government.  Good for these states.

[acidhead]

[F3SS]

I like it. That means they can only accept contributions by people. Of course this wont stop CEOs from taking an extra big bonus from the company and donating that through himself but it'll definitely curb the lobbying. Heck, less advertising money might force candidates to focus on themselves and their stances rather than blowing it all on wheelchairs and dummies to throw off cliffs to smear opponents.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-, 11 November 2012 - 03:51 PM.

[lightly]

There is this new thing now called the internet....  candidates could use it to promote their platforms.    One .gov website  could be shared by all of them to promote themselves?      There are also newspapers (which are also on-line)..  if candidates actually wanted to go into detail on their positions  they could do so in depth,for FREE!  Truth is... they don't want to get specific , until the last minute if they think they need to suck in voters.

Anyway,  Good on ya Montana & Colorado.

[Babe Ruth]

Thanks very much for this great news, Jugoso!

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

supervike, on 10 November 2012 - 11:02 PM, said:

How could anyone really vote against that?

There are people that would argue that, as Business is what drives the Economy*, Corporations are more important than the individual & should be given preferential treatment.

* and subsidises the Parties, of course


Not that I agree with that, but there are those that would argue that.