Reformers: Court ruling on campaign f...

Reformers: Court ruling on campaign finance is a setback for re...

There are 6 comments on the Daily and Sunday Review story from Jan 23, 2010, titled Reformers: Court ruling on campaign finance is a setback for re.... In it, Daily and Sunday Review reports that:

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturns federal limits on corporate campaign spending is viewed by reformers as a setback to efforts to strengthen Pennsylvania's weak campaign spending law.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Daily and Sunday Review.

Ohio Wrangler

AOL

#1 Jan 23, 2010
I think it is time to find ways to clean up our judges and justices. They are getting as bad as our politicians. This is the rottenest thing they could do for the public. The campaign finanaces need to be cut so Independents can have a chance since we need to curb the two parties we have drastically. They also have been guilty of twisting our constitution to suit their purposes.
Ridic

Alexandria, VA

#2 Jan 23, 2010
Ohio Wrangler wrote:
I think it is time to find ways to clean up our judges and justices. They are getting as bad as our politicians. This is the rottenest thing they could do for the public. The campaign finanaces need to be cut so Independents can have a chance since we need to curb the two parties we have drastically. They also have been guilty of twisting our constitution to suit their purposes.
Have you read their opinion?
Publius Novus

Centreville, VA

#3 Jan 24, 2010
We started going down this path when the Burger Court decided that corporations had First Amendment rights. What happened to original intent? The Founders never believed that corporations were entitled to First Amendment rights because there were no corporations in 1787. I guess a slight amendment to the Declaration of Independence is in order: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men and corporations are created equal,...."
Ohio Wrangler

AOL

#4 Jan 25, 2010
I read their opinion and I still feel it will be more harm than good. We need restrictions on what a campaign for office costs, so others can run that don't have the funds to be on tv and ditty bopping all over the country
Pa Strangler

York, PA

#5 Jan 25, 2010
Ohio Wrangler wrote:
I read their opinion and I still feel it will be more harm than good. We need restrictions on what a campaign for office costs, so others can run that don't have the funds to be on tv and ditty bopping all over the country
Yea, right, you read the opinion. Shocked that you can even read.
Probably read to you by one of THEM THERE "talkin' machines".
Ohio Wrangler

AOL

#6 Jan 25, 2010
Pa Strangler Up Yours

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Franklin & Marshall College Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News First Read: The Clinton Bounce Is Real (Aug '16) Aug '16 YouDidntBuildThat 1
News Amid recent turmoil, Trump slips in a Wisconsin... (Mar '16) Apr '16 bottlecap 20
News Admiration abounds for Weiner's wife despite pu... (Jul '13) May '15 RayOne 31
News Porn scandal poses risk for Corbett campaign (Oct '14) Oct '14 Tom Corbett Sandusky 2
News Tom Wolf visits Allentown, blasts Gov. Tom Corb... (Oct '14) Oct '14 silly rabbit 1
News Credit Suisse's Steven Rattner Resigns as Chair... (Aug '08) Mar '14 Mair 2
News Kittappa files petitions to run in the 16th (Mar '14) Mar '14 lady 1
More from around the web