OWS FTW?
Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL), left, introduced legislation Friday aimed at removing corporate cash from politics by amending the constitution to outlaw corporate money in elections. Cleverly named Outlawing Corporate Cash Undermining the Public Interest in our Elections and Democracy (OCCUPIED), the law would reverse Citizens United.
From Suzy Khimm’s interview with Rep. Deutch:
Suzy Khimm: I understand this amendment was directly inspired by Occupy Wall Street. Tell me more about how this all came to be.
Ted Deutch: One thing that’s been clear throughout the protests all across the country is that people are tired of a political system that they believe doesn’t respond to their needs, that doesn’t reflect the interests of the American people, and that caters to the corporations that have occupied Washington for far too long. […]
SK: So corporations don’t have any right to participate in elections? Why should they be treated differently than, say, labor unions or nonprofit organizations ? Unions also benefited from Citizens United, but, as I understand it, they wouldn’t be affected by your amendment.
TD: Corporations that are formed for the purpose of earning profits do not have the constitutionally protected rights that natural citizens have. They should not spend their corporate dollars, Treasury dollars to influence outcome of elections.
[As for unions and nonprofits], the amendment gives Congress the authority to create a campaign finance system that ultimately is fair across the board . . . that gives the government back to the people. The amendment specifically reverses Citizens United in making clear that for-profit corporations shouldn’t be spending money on elections. Any other group of people, group of individuals, is going to be in same position as they are now.
SK: If there’s such overwhelming support for these kind of changes though, why not wait for the legal system to come to that conclusion?
TD: [Justice] Stevens vehemently disagreed with the position of the court, legal scholars across America have disagreed . . . but there is every reason to believe the Supreme Court may well continue down this path and move beyond Citizens United and allow corporations to contribute to candidates directly. I don’t believe the American people should wait to see if this is the direction that the Supreme Court goes. We ought to act now. It’s what the framers of the Constitution and people across America understand. [read more]
-
complimentaryup liked this
-
arthritisex liked this
-
selena12gomez liked this
-
haii-kevinn reblogged this from katcameron
-
katcameron reblogged this from climateadaptation
-
theinfatuated liked this
-
ordinarymachines liked this
-
thiscallsforvodka reblogged this from pantslessprogressive
-
somegirlsblog liked this
-
hugwhore liked this
-
ideashelf liked this
-
chrisrice95 reblogged this from pantslessprogressive
-
nerdatronz reblogged this from climateadaptation
-
queergirlfeminist reblogged this from feministladyjizz
-
queergirlfeminist liked this
-
gratefullynowhere liked this
-
she-hulk-smash liked this
-
bandeapartzine reblogged this from pantslessprogressive
-
joaosodre reblogged this from thegreenurbanist
-
siempre-palante reblogged this from feministladyjizz
-
siempre-palante liked this
-
feministladyjizz reblogged this from thegreenurbanist
-
postlude reblogged this from pantslessprogressive
-
margiecakes reblogged this from luminosa
-
123redlight liked this
-
ishouldbeashamed liked this
-
ishouldbeashamed reblogged this from thegreenurbanist
-
esmitts liked this
-
beyondredversusblue reblogged this from pantslessprogressive and added:
Does anyone feel this is a major stride or just a tiny step in a huge movement?
-
cassandrasophia reblogged this from blondesnotbombs
-
challengingduelism reblogged this from thegreenurbanist and added:
Please read the full article on the original blog for interview and shiznizzle. Challenging Duelism sez: Interesting...
-
samstumblroftumblrness reblogged this from thegreenurbanist
-
jacobisanchez reblogged this from pantslessprogressive
-
stephaniedarling liked this
-
frsh2dth reblogged this from thegreenurbanist
-
ohiknowright reblogged this from thegreenurbanist
-
bugsarefriends liked this
-
bugsarefriends reblogged this from pantslessprogressive
-
peasforeveryone liked this
-
bwall05 liked this
-
callielion liked this
-
blondesnotbombs reblogged this from matthewedwards and added:
I really hope this goes somewhere; I won’t be surprised when it (probably) doesn’t. At least it’s a gesture in the right...
-
meagrose liked this
-
thepinktutu liked this
-
gills liked this
-
nanagrossout liked this
-
nosferican reblogged this from thegreenurbanist
-
contusioexistentialis liked this
-
universxinfinity liked this
-
stickypaste reblogged this from thegreenurbanist
- Show more notes
![OWS FTW?
Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL), left, introduced legislation Friday aimed at removing corporate cash from politics by amending the constitution to outlaw corporate money in elections. Cleverly named Outlawing Corporate Cash Undermining the Public Interest in our Elections and Democracy (OCCUPIED), the law would reverse Citizens United.
From Suzy Khimm’s interview with Rep. Deutch:
Suzy Khimm: I understand this amendment was directly inspired by Occupy Wall Street. Tell me more about how this all came to be.
Ted Deutch: One thing that’s been clear throughout the protests all across the country is that people are tired of a political system that they believe doesn’t respond to their needs, that doesn’t reflect the interests of the American people, and that caters to the corporations that have occupied Washington for far too long. […]
SK: So corporations don’t have any right to participate in elections? Why should they be treated differently than, say, labor unions or nonprofit organizations ? Unions also benefited from Citizens United, but, as I understand it, they wouldn’t be affected by your amendment.
TD: Corporations that are formed for the purpose of earning profits do not have the constitutionally protected rights that natural citizens have. They should not spend their corporate dollars, Treasury dollars to influence outcome of elections.
[As for unions and nonprofits], the amendment gives Congress the authority to create a campaign finance system that ultimately is fair across the board . . . that gives the government back to the people. The amendment specifically reverses Citizens United in making clear that for-profit corporations shouldn’t be spending money on elections. Any other group of people, group of individuals, is going to be in same position as they are now.
SK: If there’s such overwhelming support for these kind of changes though, why not wait for the legal system to come to that conclusion?
TD: [Justice] Stevens vehemently disagreed with the position of the court, legal scholars across America have disagreed . . . but there is every reason to believe the Supreme Court may well continue down this path and move beyond Citizens United and allow corporations to contribute to candidates directly. I don’t believe the American people should wait to see if this is the direction that the Supreme Court goes. We ought to act now. It’s what the framers of the Constitution and people across America understand. [read more]](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_luvuczyHvg1qzr73ro1_500.jpg)
