Comments on: 22 States Back Montana in Campaign Finance Fight
Newest First
By Mark Phillips on 05-21-12 @ 8:58 pm
A piece of paper is not a person. Paper has no expressed rights under the federal or state constitution. Corporations are pieces of paper. Therefore, corporations should have no expectation of treatment as
people under either constitution.
By Iuchiban on 05-22-12 @ 7:10 am
Can you sue a piece of paper? Can you sue a tree? Yet you can sue a corporation. What is youropinion on union campaign spending? Is it no different then corporation spending? If different,
why other then corporations are evil?
By MT Justice on 05-23-12 @ 11:44 pm
What about the fact that CCA and all the lobbyists for prisons for profit has funded campaign money for the Governor of Montana and is wining and dining politicians right now. CCA is Correctional
Corporations of America. The largest prison corporation in the nation. I feel it is a double standard
for the MT AG to make a claim against the corruption from clear back in 1912, yet nothing is said
about what is going on right now while taking money from all their lobbyists. Some of their biggest
stockholders include Wells Fargo, that is a huge banking corporation, the list goes on. What is the
limit on that kind of funding for campaigns? Why isn’t someone addressing the issue? CCA has
offered to buy out 48 states of prisons with a 20 year contract of 90%+ occupancy. You don’t
consider that a large corporation? While one thing is being said out front to the public, there is
money funneling through the back door.
By MT Justice on 05-23-12 @ 11:48 pm
Excuse me that should be Corrections Corporation of America.
By reggie on 05-26-12 @ 9:05 am
Luchiban: One big difference between union political spending and corporate political spending is the different reasons they exist. The primary reason most corporations exist is stated in their
charter….FOR PROFIT. Whereas the primary reason any union exists is to protect people from
extreme financial exploitation.
Our 35+ year decline in percentage of unionized workforce (as part of the “supply side”
economic failure…down to the lowest of any first world country)) is almost exactly matched by
our national rate of lifestyle decline for the 99%.
To equate union political spending with corporate political spending, when it has fallen from
about 8 to 1 corporation spending to union spending in the 1980s down to 20 to 1 now, is
downright Orwelian.
How do you suggest people raise the funds necessary to get their message out in the face of
unlimited anonymous political spending directly from corporate treasuries?
By Roark on 05-27-12 @ 8:56 am
My liberal whimsies, stop drinking the kool-aid and exercise a modicum or reason.
“http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=17303
By Roark on 05-27-12 @ 8:59 am
Reggie, are you serious? check your premises. you are, yet again context dropping, thus wilfully lying about what unions are and do.
“The artificially high wages forced on the economy by compulsory unionism imposed
economic hardships on other groups—particularly on non-union workers and on unskilled
labor, which was being squeezed gradually out of the market. Today’s widespread
unemployment is the result of organized labor’s privileges and of allied measures, such as
minimum wage laws. For years, the unions supported these measures and sundry welfare
legislation, apparently in the belief that the costs would be paid by taxes imposed on the
rich. The growth of inflation has shown that the major victim of government spending and
of taxation is the middle class. Organized labor is part of the middle class—and the actual
value of labor’s forced “social gains” is now being wiped out.”—-Ayn Rand
By Roark on 05-27-12 @ 9:00 am
The mother of all unions is North Korea. Is that a value that ought to be sought after?-the price is tyranny.
By reggie on 05-28-12 @ 9:45 am
Again quoting an advocate of the failed “supply side” scam whial ignoring the ongoing tragedy of this error for the general population indicates it is you who has trouble learning.
Unions are (and always were) the people’s answer to corporate tyranny. That is why they are
always depicted in negative terms in the corporate media. But the truth is easy to find, just
compare the lifestyle of the 99% in the U.S. before and after the advent of unions. Or before
the supply side scam was started here (complete with successfull war on unions) and
continuing through to the lifestyle of the 99% today. Or compare all nations on earth today;
those with strong functioning unions lifestyle of majority against those without strong unions
majority lifestyle.
And here I thought the mother of all unions was the UNITED States of America!
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.