Obama backs Amendment to Overturn Citizens United

Citzens United may have already overstayed its welcome. After the first anniversary of this ruling, politicians are finding out how limitless, unlimited corporate contributions can be. When you want to control the figurehead of the corporate superpower, turns out a whole lot of money starts flowing. RawStory reports that $40 million has already been spent on negative campaigning against Obama, $30 million more has just been raised and quotes Obama’s campaign, “Meanwhile, Karl Rove, the Koch brothers and others have joined together to raise almost a half billion dollars, again for one singular purpose: to defeat the president in November”. Finally I think it is sinking in to some politicians how ridiculous these money piles are, especially when they buy nothing but vitriol and further division among our people. When our economy is in such a state, the glaring contrast between the glossed over slime of slick TV ads and the desperation for employment to cover basic needs is nauseating.

Since endorsing (giving his blessing to) the SuperPAC “Priorities USA“, Obama has gotten a lot of guff for reversing his position on using the SuperPACs.  His campaign will vocally disapprove of them but in reality, encourage folks to contribute to the limitless “warchest” of corporate contribution. Obama is in a fix because principles are hard to stick by when the facts on the ground points to a pandora’s box of  untold millions (billions?) ready to continue a negative campaign against him. This seemingly hypocritical stance makes him an easy target for haters, but even thoughtful allies have some harsh words for Obama (from the Huffingtonpost),

“It is a dumb approach,” Feingold said in a phone interview with The Huffington Post. “It will lead to scandal and there are going to be a lot of people having corrupt conversations about huge amounts of money that will one day regret that they went down the route of what is effectively a legalized Abramoff system.”

It is difficult to look squeaky clean when you are willing to get down in the muck with your detractors. The campaign has tried to set up some kind of veiled distinction between the first couple actually campaigning and what Priotities USA will actually be doing, it is about as convincing as the passing of the torch for a SuperPAC between Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. (Who are lampooning the whole convoluted system – with real money and real candidacies and promises that they don’t know what they’re doing so they couldn’t possibly coordinated campaigns, even if they use each other’s staff.) What Obama is doing hurts him on the authenticity count, but I think most of his base realizes how nasty campaigns are and realizes that he is against a tsunami of negative campaigning.

So Obama, has said he will back a constitutional amendment that expressly revokes the rights of corporations as people. The president is always a good ally to have in such matters. Let’s hope the disgust at this campaign season will cause a groundswell of calls to create that amendment. The politicians, while they may not like this SupePAC “surprise” of unknown amounts of money from unknown donors waiting to take them down, at least they are familiar with this general system of money buying loyalty. If we don’t have a similar system, I honestly don’t believe most politicians would know how to act.

If this debacle of a decision doesn’t call for publicly funded elections, I don’t know what should. I am not sure how anyone equates buying influence with a good democracy. Multinational corporations with no “American” interest, no taxes paid, and often subsidized by our tax dollars, are allowed to run full on electioneering campaigns. There is no limit to their scope and reach. With publicly funded elections, our representative don’t have to spend their careers trying to get re-elected, they might actually focus on their job of making good decisions and getting informed. The election system could establish some public forums in which to vet potential candidates, the airwaves would not be clogged with superfluous vitriol, there would be a limit on spending. The hope is that since candidates would not be frantically outspending one another, they could once again return to the work of the people. I think this option is attractive to more than just Democratic politicians, but the unknown is frightening to politicians that have fared well in the current system. Of course this is another example of the “free market” “working” for “us”. Excuse the excessive use of quotes, but all three of those terms are relative – contested concepts.

The bigger question is this: do we like democracy or plutocracy? This country was established as a democratic republic, when you elect representatives that then hand ruling power over to a corporation, the ruling system changes into something else. Citizens United follows the thinking that whatever entity has the most money should be heard from the most, is the most important, and should be in charge of our politics. America, and her “free market” champions are caught up in an historically adolescent fantasy of bling. Romney has certainly cemented his positioning with his, “corporations are people my friend”, line; he is the quintessential opportunist capitalist. Let’s hope that Obama’s compromising position and nearly forced stance on a new amendment will re-invigorate the grassroots to clear up any confusion; corporations are not people in any way, shape, or form.  Let’s get that in writing.

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 thoughts on “Obama backs Amendment to Overturn Citizens United

  1. kevdog says:

    Nice article, Obama’s in a pickle when it comes to this issue. But let’s not forget he’s had 3 years to address these sorts of issues (and a myriad of others), and has basically sat on his hands. He’s sort of like the guy who says that he needs to eat better, and then orders a pizza.. Let’s not forget that when he took office, he had a historic mandate (the election), both houses of Congress, and a country that was yearning for a different approach. He blew it by playing bi-partisan games with an opposition party bent on destroying him, I mean he couldn’t even get the blue-dogs Dems to play along!!..

    I believe many Democrats and Independents frustration with Obama comes from the realization that he’s just another beltway democrat playing the same game that’s always been played. Especially when it comes to Wall St, the banks and large corporations..

    He’s just been a huge letdown…

    • Amy Meier says:

      I think your assessment is fair. The only caveat is that Obama himself predicted in a speech prior to his election that he was not a wonderboy and that lots of people were reading whatever they wanted into his candidacy. He stated then that what he did in an “activist” sense would depend entirely on whether or not he felt the American public’s groundswell of support behind him. For progressives, the relief of not having a Republican in office made for a period of resting on laurels – which sort of continues today. The Occupation movement is the closest thing we’ve got to grassroots groundswell – which is why he felt compelled to at least defend his actions (and realizing that they were objectionable).

      I strongly agree around your point “he blew it by playing bi-partisan games”. The way a leader is seen as stronger is when they stand by their principles and fight! (See my post: Obama Straddles the Fence). The Dems have got to learn that, the Repubs sure have. When only one side compromises, it leads “the middle” moving further and further away from the obliging side. The only defense I can think of for Dems in general is that I think some of them start out with straightforward pure intentions, but along the way they’re forced to participate in this broken system and all but a very, few lose their way.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: