• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

SHould we end "Citizens United" by the court or amendment?

independentusa said:
I wonder if any of you understand what a coporation is, apparently not. Corporations were created for just two reasons. The first was to limit the liablity of the owners to just what is invested in the corporation. The second is to be able to raise money through stock sales. In business they are treated as you would a person, but they until CU made were considered a person for free speech purposes and most legal scholars think that CU was a really bad decision.
Click to expand...

Most?

A corporation is just a legal fiction to allow a group of people to act as one, legally. There are many more reasons than two as to why they are created.
 
independentusa said:
I wonder if any of you understand what a coporation is, apparently not. Corporations were created for just two reasons. The first was to limit the liablity of the owners to just what is invested in the corporation. The second is to be able to raise money through stock sales. In business they are treated as you would a person, but they until CU made were considered a person for free speech purposes and most legal scholars think that CU was a really bad decision.
Click to expand...

I understand clearly what corporations are, having been chairman of several small limited companies and corporations. If corporations were not legal persons, they could not enter into contracts or be legally liable for anything.

I'm not a Constitutional lawyer, but as I understand it, there is precedent for political contributions being considered speech. The CU decision appears to be consistent with existing law and precedent.

Having said that, I don't like it and would strongly support an amendment to overturn it. I favor public funding for elections, with every candidate on the same footing for campaign spending.

Just a thought... Leading with a gratuitous (and dead wrong) insult added nothing to your post. Our positions on this are apparently not too different, at least from a practical point of view. Most discussions of issues go better without personal remarks.
 
swing_voter said:
Trump spent very little money and beat out candidates with 10 times as much money.
Click to expand...

Trump had an unlimited secret budget, courtesy of the FSB that fed the Trump message disguised as real news through the social media feed of 160 million Americans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom