Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: BillMoyers exposes: The "1 Percent Supreme Court", secret 527 C4 PACs-Moyers Urges All Americans Protest

Posted 1 year ago on Sept. 23, 2012, 9:30 p.m. EST by gsw (2727)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

http://mobile.rawstory.com/therawstory/#!/entry/former-fec-chair-tells-moyers-superpacs-are-shadow-party-committees,505cf103444f6789476e243f

Trevor Potter, who helped Steven Colbert set up his superPac, tells Moyers C4 PACs are in violation of Citizens United ruling.

Corporations should not influence elections. Corporations goal to increase their profits. They can influence laws, to their financial benefit.

Supreme Court doesn't have real world experience, and SC was ideological, ignoring 200 years of historical law and precedence.

These secret donations violate Citizen United, as the donations are secret.

C4s can donate anonymous money to superpacs. http://www.opensecrets.org/news/reports/citizens_united.php

PACS paying 1 of every 5 pro Obama Adds. 4 of 5 Romney adds.

At end of the program Moyers says "every citizen should put a sign on stoop or lawn opposing Citizens United.

http://billmoyers.com/spotlight/money-politics/

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php. For More on SuperPACS. This excellent must-see Link explains 893 SuperPACs, how much they raised, who they support.

Supreme Court has sold our democracy to corporations. You Must See This! http://billmoyers.com/episode/the-one-percent-court/

11 Comments

11 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by gsw (2727) 1 year ago

Bill Moyers urges all to post signs against the government/ citizens united.

foreigners can determine US election!!'!!!!!!

http://www.thenation.com/article/169639/never-mind-super-pacs-how-big-business-buying-election

In his dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens warned that the Court’s logic, which put campaign spending by corporations on an equal footing with spending by individuals, would open the door to foreign influence on American elections. The decision affords “the same protection to multinational corporations controlled by foreigners as to individual Americans,” wrote Stevens.

The retiring justice, in the longest dissent of his career, mocked the majority’s claims that corporations are censored in American society. Had the decision been in place before World War II, he noted, Japanese propaganda broadcasts in the South Pacific would have been accorded First Amendment protections. And although Stevens continued to sound the alarm about foreign influence in speeches, lobbyists immediately recognized the ways that corporations could take advantage of the extraordinary decision.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by gsw (2727) 1 year ago

And secret donor anonymous groups outspend PACS 2 to 1

http://www.thenation.com/article/169641/secret-election-money-unleashed

[-] 2 points by gsw (2727) 1 year ago

Meanwhile, debates remain closed to protect the one percent

http://www.thenation.com/article/169635/open-presidential-debates

[-] 1 points by gsw (2727) 1 year ago

The article above further states...

The real tsunami in corporate spending has come from nonprofits, in particular trade associations, which are classified as 501(c)(6) organizations under the tax code and are virtually fully funded by corporate cash. In 2010, 501(c)(6) trade associations and 501(c)(4) issue-advocacy groups outspent Super PACs $141 million to $65 million, according to the Center for Public Integrity and the Center for Responsive Politics.

After Citizens United, trade associations quickly moved to augment their traditional PAC spending with secret corporate cash. Take the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the pharmaceutical industry’s trade association. In 2008, PhRMA spent less than $200,000 on federal elections, using only money bundled from transparent individual contributions, mostly from drug company executives. The following election cycle, after Citizens United, PhRMA spent $10.36 million on federal elections, 98 percent of it from undisclosed corporate sources.

Likewise, the shift allowed the National Association of Realtors, already a heavy hitter when it came to PAC spending, to unleash an additional $1.1 million on federal elections from undisclosed real estate companies in 2010.

“What Citizens United has done, it has wholesale changed the landscape,” said Stefan Passantino, a partner at the law and lobbying firm McKenna, Long & Aldridge and a former Newt Gingrich campaign adviser. He was addressing a seminar in Atlanta, Georgia, on corporate political engagement in the 2012 election cycle. He recounted advising one corporate client on how to “engage in an issue where we’re not popular,” in this case to preserve certain tax loopholes. Passantino said businesses have enormous new opportunities for influencing elections without being detected. “We gotta keep our corporate logo out of the bull’s-eye,” he added.

The ability to avoid disclosure is what makes trade associations the perfect vehicle for corporate electioneering. Quirks in IRS rules allow trade associations to hide all of their donor information. The few disclosures mandated for 501(c)(6) organizations, which pertain to yearly budget information and transfers of money to other groups, only become public a full year after an election has occurred. The disclosures for trade associations active this election season won’t be released until the fall of 2013—and even then we won’t know which individual corporations provided funds for the ads blanketing the airwaves.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2727) 1 year ago

Basically the supreme court fucked up, and corporations, which should not have a voice in politics, now controls politics.

All Americans: Get out you sign for stoop or lawn, advises Bill Moyers at close of show to protest Citizens United.

Here is who benefits from SuperPacs. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/18/the-super-pac-economy.html

And why Rocky says Obama Prostitute for Rich and Powerful http://occupywallst.org/forum/obama-apologists/#comment-839933 No wonder SC doesn't want common people showing up to speak at SC building.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2727) 1 year ago

Bain Capital spent $800,000.00 in 2008 for lobbying. http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000021859&year=2012

I wonder what that was going towards.

Now corporations can give directly, unlimited amount to candidate of choice, through 527c4 who could donate to a superPac.

No wonder Apathetics feel they don't have a true voice in their democracy now.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2727) 1 year ago

Lobbying Database In addition to campaign contributions to elected officials and candidates, companies, labor unions, and other organizations spend billions of dollars each year to lobby Congress and federal agencies. Some special interests retain lobbying firms, many of them located along Washington's legendary K Street; others have lobbyists working in-house. We've got totals spent on lobbying, beginning in 1998, for everyone from AAI Corp. to Zurich Financial.

You can use the options below to search through our database in several ways: search by name for a company, lobbying firm or individual lobbyist; search for the total spending by a particular industry; view the interests that lobbied a particular government agency; or search for lobbying on a general issue or specific piece of legislation. http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/index.php

[-] 1 points by gsw (2727) 1 year ago

Bill Moyers Poor have lost their voice in election.

http://www.upworthy.com/poor-people-havent-lost-their-voice-they-cant-afford-a-voice?c=upw1

Fred Barnes said SuperPACS big force in GOP winning House in 2010.

[-] -1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

we can kvetch OR we can do:


http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com

A constitutional amendment to

Overturn Citizens United { CU }
and
Corporate Personhood { CP }

For a complete analysis of the amendment issue,

and the text of all amendments,
and our comparison of all of the amendments,
and the Citizens United case transcript,
and the Citizens United decision,
and the Buckley “money is speech” decision,
and analysis of corporate personhood,
and analysis of Article III,
and the ABC News poll on CU / CP,
and the PFAW poll on CU / CP,
and 70+ video clips on CU / CP from

Chomsky, Hedges, Witchcraft, Reich, Nader , Justice Stevens,
Warren, Lessig, Hartmann, Maher, Kucinich, Grayson, Yugur Sanders, Hightower, etc.

JOIN our OWS Working Group:
http://nycga.net/groups/restore-democracy

REGULAR MEETINGS:
Wednesdays 5:30-7:30PM @ 60 Wall St – The Atrium

Our OWS Working Group has one goal -
To support the OWS Declaration

“a democratic government derives
its just power from the people,
not from corporations”

and to do what polls show
80% of Americans want -

To get corrupting money out
of our political system by passing
a Constitutional Amendment that will:

►Reverse the 2010 Supreme Court decision
..…Citizens United that enabled super-pacs
►Reverse the 1976 Supreme Court decision
..…Buckley that equated money is speech
►Eliminate the 1886 judicially created fiction
..…that corporations are people

We will attract candidates to …support an amendment, and we will attract voters to …support an amendment, and we will attract voters to support …candidates who support an amendment

[-] 1 points by gsw (2727) 1 year ago

The Supreme Court has provides for 1 Percent dominate the 99 percent:

http://billmoyers.com/episode/the-one-percent-court/

"it is almost too late"....for America's democracy.

Every voter should watch this before election!