Ralph Nader Blasts Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

by Maireid Sullivan | January 22, 2010 at 07:18 pm

487 views | 26 Recommendations | 10 comments

Ralph Nader offers a biting commentary on the Supreme Court decision delivered by Justice Kennedy, Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Scalia, Alito, and Thomas in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case.

Nader begins his discussion by citing Justices Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor's 90-page rebuttal of the Supreme Court Decision.

Justice Stevens finds it “absurd to think that the First Amendment prohibits legislatures from taking into account the corporate identity of a sponsor of electoral advocacy.” He flatly declares that, “The Court’s ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation.”

Stevens notes that the, Framers of our Constitution “had little trouble distinguishing corporations from human beings, and when they constitutionalized the right to free speech in the First Amendment, it was the free speech of individual Americans that they had in mind.”

Nader said, "Yesterday's 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission shreds the fabric of our already weakened democracy by allowing corporations to more completely dominate our corrupted electoral process."

With this decision, corporations can now directly pour vast amounts of corporate money, through independent expenditures, into the electoral swamp already flooded with corporate campaign PAC contribution dollars. Without approval from their shareholders, corporations can reward or intimidate people running for office at the local, state, and national levels.

Justice Stevens concludes his dissent as follows: At bottom, the Court’s opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense. While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics.

For more information watch Keith Olbermann's Special Comment on this decision: Freedom Of Speech Has Been Destroyed

2 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend Sign In or Join to post comments

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 03:00 on January 23rd, 2010

Ralph Nader has credibility, Keith Olberman not so much.

I agree that a corporations sponsored candidate is troublesome, unfortunately it now legalizes, what was already done in an overt way.

Maireid Sullivan

at 03:17 on January 23rd, 2010

Yes, exactly, Karl - this legitimizes overt practice and removes all pretense of credibility. It also removes the necessity of middle-men - the Lobbyists, who are paid to manipulate politicians on behalf of their corporate clients. Corporation can spend PR budgets directly on the candidates of their choice. This takes government and corporate administrative interchangeability to a new level, and citizens are just customers.

While we are mindfully watching democratic process break down before our eyes, how will the democratic majority respond?

Re. Keith Olberman, I don't like his whining style, but what he has to say can't be faulted.

I plan on transcribing this latest commentary so I can study it.

aurealeus

at 03:46 on January 23rd, 2010

"While we are mindfully watching democratic process break down before our eyes,

...how will the democratic majority respond?"

Anyone know what the correct answer should be?

aurealeus

at 03:18 on January 23rd, 2010

For some background on how corporations achieved this control and dominance over the American society, read this NP story.

Maireid Sullivan

at 03:47 on January 23rd, 2010

Thank you for the recommendation.

I just read it. Fascinating indeed.

"Corporate" corruption isn't new. Some time ago I transcribed the following scene from the film Union Pacific. because it is such a terrific reflection on how power is secretly manipulated by the powerful.

1939 B&W film UNION PACIFIC:

Scene opens with members of the US House of Representatives arguing the pros and cons of East West railroad link to California.

Next Scene: Gentleman’s Club, where one of the countries top banker enters and casually talks with a few Members of House of Representatives, who’ve gathered to informally discuss Railroad building progress.

Later, the Banker, who has stocks in the competing rail line, is heard in private discussion with his aid.

AID: "Suppose it is stopped?" Referring to the competing rail line.

BANKER: "It won’t be. I can assure you, it won’t."

St. Louis Saloon, back room:

Enter BANKER;

Sits down with saloon owner: lets him know that a detective agency has discovered his earlier ‘illegal’ exploits in Panama. He then goes on to invite him to work for him.

BANKER: “In the past, your operations have always been, shall we say, of a minor nature. Do you think you could manage the biggest Gambling Outfit? Do you think you could follow 10,000 workers, with plenty of money, out in the wilderness – supplying them with liquor and any excitement the devil can brew? DO YOU THINK YOU CAN KEEP THEM DRUNK AND DISCONTENTED MONTH AFTER MONTH?"

GAMBLER: “Go on.”

BANKER:"It means keeping your tent (saloon) with its many diversions as it moves west and selling the track layers all the trouble they’ll buy. You’ll be protected."

GAMBLER: "What’s the split?”

BANKER: "None. You take it all. …including orders from me."

GAMBLER: "What kind of orders?"

BANKER: "It will all add up the same. DELAY. Anything I might say. Everything to delay the building of the Union Pacific Railroad."

Gambler: Nods in agreement, "Why not!"

GAMBLER’S SIDEKICK ENTERS:

BANKER tells him: "I’ve been making a deal with your partner."

GAMBLER to SIDEKICK: "A big deal! We’re leaving St. Louis."

SIDKICK: "For where and for what?"

BANKER: "West, Allan. For excitement and profit."

SIDEKICK: "All right. Deal me in. Where’s my drink?"

(Offers the Banker a drink.)

BANKER: "I don’t use it."

SIDEKICK: "Well, gentlemen, here’s to what ever it is!"

…and on it goes.

aurealeus

at 03:55 on January 23rd, 2010

Reminiscent of the meeting at Jekyll Island that created the Federal Reserve...

...which is just another "corporation," by the way.

aurealeus

at 04:26 on January 23rd, 2010

Another related and interesting article titled "THE FLEECING OF AMERICA" by Stephen Lendman can be found here.

Teaser: "Corporate giants rule America and the world as the dominant institution of our time. Their influence is pervasive and profound. Over every facet of our lives. What we eat and drink. What we wear. Where we live. What we're taught. How we get our essential services. Where our main sources of information come from. How we think. Who'll govern and for whose benefit."