Help Stop Citizens United,
Round 2

Help Stop Citizens United,
Round 2

Over 10,000 20,000!! people have added their names. Add yours, then add a comment below. A special team of Represent.Us activists dressed up as giant $100 bills will hand-deliver our demand along with every message on this page directly to the Supreme Court.  

Special Update: If you’d like to join the $100 bill team and help hand-deliver our message to the Supreme Court in D.C., click here.

ABOUT MCCUTCHEON V. FEC

Think Congress is bought right now? It’s hard to believe, but things could get a whole lot worse…soon. In a new case called McCutcheon v. FEC, the amount an individual can use bribing politicians and parties per 2-year election cycle could go up from $117,000 to limitless! It’s Citizens United, Round 2.

Tell the Supreme Court to represent us and preserve free speech and equality for all Americans. We’re asking them to uphold the last remaining election-spending laws before moneyed special interests buy our country right out from under us. Add your name to our demand, then add your own comment. On October 8th, opening day of oral arguments for McCutcheon v. FEC, hundreds of Represent.Us activists will don $100 bill costumes and hand-deliver your comment, along with every other message on this web page, directly to the Supreme Court.

In America, our government is supposed to represent the people. All the people. Not just those Americans who buy politicians. We The People are being drowned out by the cha-ching of big money, and it’ll continue happening as long as we allow it to.

Citizens United put democracy on its back, and Round 2 (McCutcheon) is trying to kick us while we’re down. This is not a fight that we can afford to lose. Literally. Add your name now, and add your own message to tell the Supreme Court to preserve the foundation of American democracy and let every American have an equal voice.

Source: http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/McCutcheon.shtml

Learn More: NYTThe HillPoliticoRoll CallMother JonesNational JournalNPRSunlightUSA Today,LA TimesUSA Today.

  • boga

    All I’m getting is broken link when I try to sign the petition

    • http://represent.us/ Represent.Us

      Hi boga, the page should be working now, sorry about the problem you had!

      • boga

        Thanks! ^^ You guys do great work, keep it up!

  • 1234heythere5
  • Connie Gartner

    Democracy is of the people, allowing individuals to make unlimited and even large contributions allows the elite to have increased influence. This is already an issue that needs to be addressed, not increased.

  • Tarkus

    Donating money is not free speech: free speech does not transfer power. Saying “I don’t want a speeding ticket” does not transfer power to the ticketing officer, and is thus free speech. Handing a traffic cop $100 to refrain from ticketing you transfers power to the officer in return for changing his behavior – and is thus called “bribery”. If money donations were a form of free speech, then those with the cash could legally pay their way out of speeding tickets.

  • David Valentine

    Justice should NEVER be about the money, but it seems it is this way today, please help us stop this injustice and let us restore the government To the People, For the People and By the People, not the MONEY. Thank you. David Valentine

  • EveT

    One citizen, one vote. Not one dollar, one vote. Citizens United is the worst threat to democracy that has happened *so far* in my lifetime. Please don’t make another decision that is even worse.

  • Alex

    Dear Justices – In this day and age of unlimited connectivity, there is no reason that so much cash needs to go into politics.

  • FalleStar

    I think this is a good idea, but why not skip the giant $100 bill costumes so that there’s a chance this will be taken seriously. Gimmicks like that are childish and hurt the movement.

  • Proudscalawag

    Show some care for the spirit of democracy instead of acting like boughten hacks and killing it with your ill-written letter!!

  • K

    Your Honors: PLEASE stop the undisclosed, unlimited, and secret monies that are currently flooding our political processes and government. This is ruining our democracy! We will soon have the best democracy that money can buy! We will soon be a plutocracy and no longer a democracy!

  • Michael J.W. Thomas

    Corporations are not people – they are demons, taking every opportunity to suck every bit of our freedoms from the American Public. The decisino in 2010 was wrong. Don’t compound your error with another payment to them.

  • Maggie Schafer

    The Supreme Court has made some very bad decisions – but to enable corporations and major donors to buy elections is ridiculous! They just don’t stand for America! They struck down voting laws and if they do this, just when we are about to get citizens united possibly struck down would be another blow for democracy! No election would be able to be won without corruption!

  • T Powell

    Their are oath takers and oath keepers, witch are you ???

  • Ann

    Even with campaign finance rules and regulations we are losing our representative democracy. the only interests that are truly represented are Big Insurance (Obama care) Big Oil (endless ‘accidental’ spills and encroachment on national park land) and Big Finance ( a less stable economy and bail outs for big donors only- no fair shake for the middle class)
    help perserve the voice and power of the people!

  • MoMack

    Money is not free speech for all; it is a megaphone for the wealthy while the rest of us have to whisper into the wall. I would not want to face the karma that the paid-off, right wing judges will have to wade through in their inevitable journey toward oneness.

  • roxanne

    Our politicians are bought and sold. The people are no longer represented. Only the rich are entitled to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Stop this now! You have the power. Please……..for the sake of our children and grandchildren!

  • wilrodx

    Humanity has cancer. A well known and quite old form of cancer that
    has metastasized in the last fifty or so years.

    Though not recognized yet, so it doesn’t go unnamed, I call it
    capitalistosis.
    An insidiously vile form of greed and self deception
    that evolves into sociopathy and psychopathy.

    It starts with a little tumor the size of a huge pile of money. Then it contorts into destroying everything around it that is not “It”.
    The bigger the pile the more convinced is the tumor that there is nothing other than itself.

    The only obvious treatment is to cut out all the pile of money and
    radiate the site and hope it doesn’t come back.

    Unfortunately, this tumor is in the brain of humanity…where
    compassion and intelligence reside.

    • wilrodx

      Prognosis…terminal

  • Joanna

    I Find It Ironic That We Are Asking The Supreme Court To Reverse Their
    “Bought & Paid For Decision” On Citizens United that is destroying our Democratic system.

    If The Highest Court In The Land Can Be Bought Off, We The People Are Screwed.

    Say Goodby To Honesty – Integrity – Democracy and Equality
    With This Blantant Betrayal Of Our Trust.

    Hello Bribes – Greed – Fear Based Lies – Power Hungry Polititions and Corporate Power.

    Nice legasy you are leaving your grandchildren.

  • Retired 2001

    Side with the people and not with the rich and powerful.

  • RetCol

    Time has proven the un intended consequences of Citizens United, it was a mistake when decided and should be overturned.

  • TheGrayWolf

    To the justices of The United States Supreme Court:

    Corporations are not people. Limits are placed all the time on what corporations are allowed to say. This is not a constitutional violation, this is common sense. Please start listening to the citizens of this country, not just the few that can afford their own lobbyist.

  • Emily Dale

    If they follow the example of Clarence Thomas, their spouse will manage the money, the bribes and the “investments”, as well as developing “connections” that are advantageous to them. that way the Justice’s hands are clean.

  • Ward Gagner

    Scalia and his lapdog Thomas should be impeached for ethics violations.

  • Bigkid53

    Not only should you use this opportunity to uphold campaign limits, but you should consider reversing your ruling on Citizens United. You can see that there is no equality in the power of the corporations and the super rich’s ability to buy legislation and legislators (at all levels) and the power of the small contributor to try to help elect someone.

  • Tony

    Dear John G. Roberts, Antonin Scalia,Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Samuel Anthony Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan:

    You are our last hope. As history is written many years from today which history do you see? The beginning of a era where the wealthy outright control all elections through media domination, or the first victory of a new democracy where votes are counted equally and the bias that the wealthy have to control elections is fought and won. Your vote is the nail in the coffin or the first victory in a long revolution.

    “Those the make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable”. JFK

  • mosandel

    Citizens United is one of the greatest miscarriages of American justice and equality. Like religion in politics; as soon as you allow the influence of concentrated wealth you create a privileged class and an hierarchy of under classes. HELP GET MONEY OUT OF AMERICAN POLITICS! Work for the people NOT corporations! -Mo Sandel

  • Rose Ann

    The words of Abraham Lincoln serve as a reminder and a
    warning to all Americans; if we fail to heed them we risk losing our democracy to a plutocracy:

    “I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country….corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the
    money of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the
    prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war.”

  • tombeebe

    I don’t like corruption either. The difference is I don’t like it no matter who’s doing it. Here’s what I believe should be done. Tell me where this doesn’t adress the problem fairly: TOM BEEBE’S AMENDMENT

    (Commentary in {..}, not part of proposed Amendment)

    No candidate for the Presidency or either house of Congress shall accept contributions in cash or in kind from any organization or group of persons for expenses incurred in a campaign for that office. All such contributions shall be made only by individual citizens who shall attest that the funds or other items of value are from their own resources and that they have not received, nor have they been promised, offsetting items of value from any other party in exchange for their contribution. The identity and extent of contributors to such campaigns shall be made public for a period of thirty days from receipt before being employed or used as collateral for a loan by such campaigns. Organizations of any type, {i.e. corporations, unions, gun rights advocates, environmental protection groups, even “Susie’s Flower Shop”, a theoretical small business cited in the Citizen’s United Case,} may, without restriction, expend money to advocate a position on any issue before or likely to come before the electorate insofar as no candidate’s name or description is included in their expressions of advocacy.

    {The intent of the above is to bring “transparency” to campaign financing by removing any group from the process whereby that group may conceal the identity of an individual contributor, as well as limiting the influence of such groups or “special interests”. It further prevents an organization from making such contributions when an individual within that organization, such as a union member or corporation stockholder, may oppose the candidate. Going to the principle that the power of a group is greater than the sum of the power of the individuals within it, excluding groups prevents their use as a means of concentrating power and thereby according a greater say in elections to members of a group above that of the individual citizen. Consider also the large equity position in certain corporations that the federal government has recently taken in response to the economic crises, this is particularly important in excluding government officials from their own electoral process. The money from “special interest” groups will then go to promote that for which they exist, their “special interest”. The media will be directed to expositions on the issues facing the electorate, thus enhancing discussion and hopefully understanding of issues, bereft of personalities.

    What would be the role of political parties under this amendment? Perhaps open elections, with no party candidates listed would not be a bad thing. Anyone gathering enough names on a petition, perhaps 10% if the number of voters for that position in the last election, could be listed, with “Party Affiliation” of their choice.

    To those advocating public financing I would suggest that with money comes control. Do we want government control of the electoral process?

    Are there problems with this proposal? Certainly; it is offered as an amendment to assure it will be thoroughly debated, for that is what the amendment process provides, and in recognition that it does indeed infringe on freedom of speech and of the press, two freedoms not to be compromised lightly.}

  • Pamela Butler

    totally agree!

  • tombeebe

    Is it fair that any group of citizens have a greater voice in the political process than you and an equal number of like minded citizens? Let’s not advocate restraints on the liberty of some.Let every individual speak, but let the groups speak only on the issues, not on the representative selection. See the Amendment above.

    • wecandobetter758

      Despite what SCOTUS belikeves, corporations are not citizens. They should have no say. Each individual of a corporation has a vote. The Citizens United decision effectively gives those people more than one vote.

  • Jim INK

    It’s time to stop selling out our democracy for a Plutocracy to these global corporations that are run by the extreme rich. Washington should not be “This Town” for politicians to get rich, it’s time to get that crap out of your head and start doing something for the people because we’re all getting pissed.

  • RBK

    “I’ll believe that a corporation is a person when I see one doing time in prison. for its negligence or other offences”

  • jbutch1938

    The United States was not designed as a democracy. The designers believed that enlightened representatives with their own fortunes would represent everyone. Now the representatives are chosen by people with their own fortunes who select the representatives, and design laws, that will increase those fortunes. Those who work for wages are considered commodities, and the God of the monied will protect their immediate environment from pollution.

  • Josh Lee

    Dear Supreme Court,

    I certainly don’t envy your job as I’m certain it involves many difficult decisions on a regular basis. I would like to humbly ask you please do not remove the limit on campaign contributions. Although I’m not an expert on the constitution, I’m under the impression Freedom of Speech is protected in the 1st amendment in order to give every citizen a say in his or her government. If this is the case, then it seems each person’s voice would need to be heard. Even though large sums of money don’t always directly suppress people’s voices, it does drown them out. Today it seems whoever has the loudest microphone has the most freedom to speak. And when someone’s voice doesn’t get heard, it doesn’t matter if it was due to overt oppression or simply because the guy next to him could afford to buy a megaphone he couldn’t afford to buy. Either way it is bad for democracy. I am a Special Education teacher and my classes are always better when every students feel like they have a voice, even those who are soft spoken or don’t actually “speak” at all. If we continue to allow money to influence campaigns and therefore political decisions, it is the equivalent of paying attention only to the loudest kid in class, while ignoring all of the others. It can be tempting at times, but it’s not the way to run a classroom. It’s certainly not the way to run a government, especially one that is supposed to be by the people and for the people.

    Respectfully,

    Josh Lee

  • bobc

    Shouldn’t any justice (Thomas) whose wife makes a living cow-towing to these moneyed elites have to recuse himself from the proceedings? Only seems fair.

  • Name

    Dear Justices:
    In my opinion, you are going down in history as worst Supreme Court in the history of the United States; treaty corporations as people is obsurd; you have turned our coutry into “he who has the most wins!; are you happy and how could you possibly sleep at night; Thanks for nothing!

  • Roberta Dees

    Giving people with money the right to run over the rest of us makes a mockery of our democracy.

  • Sandra Brady

    The Un-Supreme Court is destroying America….I don’t care how much the Koch Brothers are “contributing” to Scalia and Thomas, it is still corruption at the highest level. John Roberts “Court” is the laughing stock of the world! Bought and paid for by ALEC and the Koch Brothers.

  • bobc

    Money isn’t about free speech, it’s about the volume of that speech. When obscene amounts of money allow non-human, legally ambiguous entities to drown out the voices of millions of law abiding citizens, the country is headed down the wrong path. The supreme court is cheerfully leading the way down this path. Can you say right-wing judicial activists?

  • PJC

    Dear Justices, The Preamble to the Constitution starts with: “We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union…”. It does not start off with: We the lobbyists, the politically connected, the affluent, or those whose addresses comes prefaced with a “K”. We, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Court, are the People you were appointed to represent, and we would kindly appreciate your consideration in when it comes to deciding McCutcheon.

  • Golfnut

    Please do not put our country up for sale to the highest bidder. you started the process with “CItizen’s United” and if you allow :McCutcheon v.FEC you will officially put up a sign saying “COUNTRY FOR SALE to Millionaires and corporations Only. Average citizens don’t waste your time”.

  • DemFromSC

    The American government is on the verge of total collapse due to the system of legalized bribery that is now in place. We need to overturn the Citizens United decision, institute publicly-funded campaigns, and have term limits for all members of Congress.

  • steve

    This is a request to limit the donations from the Rich Corps, Rich individuals, all who have money to burn. The Common man, Me don’t have that money available to support certain candidates for office. Citizen United was the worst decision made by the USSC, also the voter’s rights act was another disaster the USSC made, all by Political views by some of the Justices on the court. USSC is a joke.

  • macgyver1948

    There are times I have to wonder what kinds of people call them members of a free and liberated society when they choose to control government and hide their actions. Whenever I see Citizens United I know the kind. For example, our government is owned by us, Wee The People”, so that defines it as a public entity. To hide the campaign contributions, for example, seems to say ‘we do not want you to see who in government we are buying and controlling.

    We also need to look at all pledges our so-called representatives, both elected and appointed/hired, sign and commit to, not just the letter of the pledge but also the people behind it and what they are really saying. For our sake the Norquist Pledge, for one, needs to be totally looked into. I see loads of conflict of interest in it.

  • reenie46

    Nothing benefits a nation as much as good government, and nothing damages good government as much as ignored flagrant conflicts of interest! We need organizations such as United Republic to give public exposure to conflicting interests in the hopes of gathering enough public opinion to force their removal.

  • kentuckywoman2

    Either we have a democracy in this country or we do not. If the Supreme Court doesn’t feel we need one, then let’s just abolish government altogether.

  • Nick

    Really? I can’t imagine a law like that being passed without a major uproar. Why didn’t it make the news?

    • BarbaraV

      The corporate media Own the news. If they don’t like it you won’t hear of it.

      • Nick

        And you think it wouldn’t be posted here? Or at The Nation? Or at any of the conservative sites screaming about Democratic voter fraud?

        Please.

  • Julie Bernett

    Are you guys making us regress to the olden days of yore? Keep in mind that schmucks throughout history have made the lives of all people miserly and pathetic. Is that what you want for your family, friends and citizens? A world with a few assholes at the top clinging to their power and the rest of us living in poverty and oppression? Cuz if it is, you are pathetic pieces of shit. Ya’ll need to evolve into the 21st Century.

  • Fernando

    It is GOD that we put our trust in, not these “5 infallible justices” who are destroying the oldest Democracy in the world with their decisions.
    We need to pray that they can be replaced by sensible justices, before it is too late for the USA. It’s been a long 13 years since they started to usurp our rights and by now they are almost finished with our Democracy converting our country into another third world fundamentalist regime, driven by money.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Matt-Straw/100000873607823 Matt Straw

    Worst SCOTUS ever is literally telling the people A/ The Constitution sucks, and B/ Big Business is better at running this country than a representative government. Fake Five should recuse themselves from humanity due to conflict of interest.

  • Bradkh1

    The money absolutely has to be taken out of Politics and Statesmenship returned. I didn’t think it could be done but with the buying of America we have actually managed to break Capitalism. Our result of the 1% vs the 99% is matching that of communism, fascism, socialism or any number of other systems you want to review. Our only chance of some sort of democracy is to get the money out and the people in.

  • Frank Pautz

    It won’t change by itself, sign me up!

  • http://www.androidgnosis.com/ Jeremy Whitman

    Please don’t sell out country to the corporations. It’s time to listen to the people before it’s too late.

  • T

    This is just another example of how government no longer represents it’s own constituents. Everyday more legislation is introduced that is parasitic to our own well being and a transparent attempt to turn this once great nation into a third world country controlled by an oligarchy. There exists a vacuum of morality in washington. Cashing in on special interest groups that serve representatives re-elections and not the people they serve has become business as usual. Sometimes I am utterly ashamed at the abandonment of all principle and propriety of those entrusted with our representation.

  • Leslie S.

    To even consider hearing this case is nothing less than a Supreme slap in the face of all those who have supported this allegedly Supreme court for decades. It is time for intelligent replacements for every single one of you!

  • ConcernedCitizen

    Justices,

    I really cannot say anything that you do not already know or haven’t already heard… all I can do is offer my personal plea and hope that “someone” anyone may hear it.

    We claim to be civilized.. our world is falling apart.. I am but a meager, lower class, citizen of what was once perceived as a great nation. I am no genius and have many mistakes in my past to prove it. But “I” am a human, designed to flaw.. Government is a system with checks and balances… Why is it that “I” can see and determine right from wrong, but our “Government” cannot?

    “It’s not about right or left, it’s about right and wrong”

  • frankblank

    ” [Judge Brown] conceded that ‘the constitutional line between
    political speech and political contributions grows increasingly
    difficult to discern.’ ”

    In the fog, lies become truth. The entire conflation of money and speech is simply a lie. A flat out lie. But, argue the liars, you are expressing something when you donate money. It is an act of political speech. And you express something when you shoot somebody. Or steal their car. By the logic of the liars, almost every act you perform is analogous to speech and thus should be similarly unregulated.

    And it doesn’t look like corruption to them. To criminals, crime looks like ordinary behavior,

  • Howard Burke

    Consider your place in history. Citizens United is a disaster and McCutcheon v. FEC could very well turn America in a post-fascist failure. Please, think carefully. Give us back the America we were born in.

  • av8ter

    Please stop the insanity of “Money is speech and Corporations are People”! In the interest of maintaining and strengthening our democracy I hope you can come to your senses and understand that limitless campaign contributions are destroying our democracy from under us and promoting unlimited corruption into our system of governance. Our government is for the people, by the people and of the people as designed by our Founding Fathers who in their brilliance set up what has worked so well until our recent past 35 years where it has gone so wrong! Wake up before the damage becomes permanent. Our record is not good, record unemployment, record poverty, declining middle class, most expensive health care system in the world, declining education system, declining infrastructure and corruption in our national businesses are wreaking havoc on our citizens. Unlimited campaign contributions will not solve our more urgent issues of our times. Do the right thing and deny this silliness and insanity now!

  • dp7

    I signed this petition, but the problem isn’t going to be solved at the Supreme Court. They are only there to interpret constitutionality. It is seeming as though the current draft of the constitution is in favor of (or at least vague about) this insane political spending. We shouldn’t be relying on a few POTUS-appointed civil servants to solve our problems. That’s what our elected officials are for. If current anti-corruption regulations don’t pass constitutional scrutiny, then it’s time for an amendment. Corruption loopholes have to be closed at the highest level.

  • nancyblovell

    This would limit the “who can out do” the other (with unlimited funds) to “purchase” votes. He who “out spends” usually wins. The limits should be on individuals, associations, businesses and NO overseas money. The focus should be on issues that represent “us” not the money representing “us”.

  • Robert Lovejoy

    Or, should we just drop all pretense and declare the country a Plutocracy?

  • AZ_E.Warren_Supporter

    I just can’t believe our government — even the Supreme Court — is cow-towing to mega-money corporations and the super-rich! How did we (“The People”) let this happen?! We in the U.S. are rapidly losing our prosperous middle-class, and the numbers of those living in poverty are swelling. Once-beautiful cities are becoming sprawling ghost-towns — lawless and spooky (I’m particularly thinking of Detroit!). Many now live in their cars, without jobs or hope for the future. The very scenario predicted in the movie “It’s a Beautiful Life” is HAPPENING RIGHT NOW! OMG!!

  • wendy

    corporations are not peole. they do not breathe, eat or pay taxes. we do

  • Beth

    Dear Justices, we are already well on the road to becoming a third world, “banana republic,” Just a little more corruption and we’re further down the road to a dictatorship of the wealthy.

  • Anthony Mainolfa

    our nation is an embarrassment and a laughing stock to the rest of the world. how sad that even the majority of our supreme court justices have been bought and are owned by the 1% who hold the purse strings. shame on all of us for allowing this to happen.

  • Lisa

    Equal representation means a vote for every citizen, not every dollar. Allowing rich mega-corporations to govern the masses will reduce the god-given rights and assets of hardworking Americans while allowing the rich to languish comfortably in their already ludicrous wealth. Poverty is the worst form of tyranny, and isn’t independence from Tyranny the very reason this country was founded?

  • D. W. O’Rourke

    Please end this unlimited contributions from the rich corporations. We’ve already gone through the era of John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan and Carnegie. I thought we had progressed, but it seems like we’re right back in the 1900′s.

  • Bvirginia

    The world itself is on the timeline for extinction due to sell outs in Congress.

  • Frank Wilson

    Hows the “…Citizens are people not Corporations…” Constittional Amendment going? And what about another prposal, 100% public funding for all elected Federal positions?

  • Bvirginia

    They must have gotten paid off with money the rich 1% connived out of our wages and gone overseas money. They use the money they connive from us, using Congress of course, to further destroy our nation. Think tanks, attack ads etc, cost money.

  • Bvirginia

    Another nail in the coffin of America.

  • Kandeda Trefil`

    Justices…what justice is inherent when the rich can get what they want with bribes? Representing the rich over other factions is not, as you know, justice, so please do what you know reflects decency.

  • Alanem9

    Are we looking to turn America into an oligarchy and obliterate democratic principles? The disastrous decision by the Supreme Court in the Citizens United Case was a blow to me, and, I believe to the majority of Americans as well,
    It is what mobilzed the Occupy Movement into action, and although the visible physical presence of that movement appears to have faded, the consciousness is still very much alive.
    Surely the Supreme Court judges will have come to their senses and not allow the few to further the corporate takeover of our children’s future.
    May the Supreme Court be judicious and wise in the McCutcheon vs FEC Case.

  • Damon Mason

    Supreme Court, I have never forgotten that you appointed George Walker Bush as our president … it is absolutely shameful to have a government whose idea of industry is to manufacture perfectly good citizens into criminals and where you can buy away your culpability.

    Corporations must NEVER be at the par of a regular citizen!!!

  • Heather Owen

    Money does not equal speech. Billionaires should not be allowed to have a disproportionally large influence over politics and politicians. Eliminating spending limits in elections means that only the very richest individuals and corporations will have any say in public policy, and that not only undermines our democracy, it is not in our country’s best interests.

    Overturning spending limits means that billionaires will spend their money, not on hiring American workers or innovation or building our country’s infrastructure, but on ensuring they get the most advantageous tax benefits and control over our foreign policy. Allowing them unlimited access to buying elections means that their monopoly on power and money will allow them to eliminate all their local competitors, making our economy more vulnerable and our products less competitive on the world market. And, when they’ve drained our country dry, they’ll simply move on.

    Corruption undermines countries, especially democracies. Eliminating spending limits altogether means condemning our country to corruption. If you value our country and our freedom, do not undermine the FEC.

  • greenlantern1

    Didn’t we learn our lesson with Noel Bush?
    Silverado?

  • cjs

    Allowing unlimited contributions will not just disenfranchise citizens, it will also be bad for corporate competition and thus the US economy, since it it likely to allow really large corporations to unduly influence the regulatory and government contract environments.

  • Jperiod

    If Citizens United 2 passes the Supreme Court, we know they are for sale too.

  • Mary Ayers

    Don’t we all expect in this Democracy that when men of the law, with their years of experience and knowledge of our troubled history, will do the best for the most of the citizens. Ideology should be an impeachable offense.
    The ethics and the manner should be extremely close to isolation from any part of society that may look to be intimidating to their position.

  • lugia

    I hope one day you’ll find that people are more important than money… People have feelings, money doesn’t.

  • Charles Barber

    We have a country that is for the people by the people, not for corporations by the people. If their is to be a fair an unbiased system then there must be a cap on how much an entity, corporate or personal, can spend on an election.

  • Dave Johnston

    Don’t let our democracy be up for sale to the highest bidder..

  • Severian

    The Citizens United decision represented the Supreme Court unequivocally stating that American democracy was a market commodity that was, and rightfully should be, for sale to the highest bidder. Shame on you! Clearly the majority of that court believes in oligarchy, and most adamantly NOT in democracy, and will do anything to further that cause, including this latest crime against the American People.

  • borntobewild

    The founding fathers wanted members of congress to be “dependent upon the people alone”. Running for Congress now costs so much money that candidates naturally become dependent upon BIG MONEY and those that can supply same.

    It may not be quid pro quo corruption but it IS corruption of the election system nonetheless. For incumbants, it bleeds into corruption of the governing system as well. They spend too much time, focus and energy upon raising money.

    Certainly everyone can agree the dependency upon big money overwhelms the “dependency upon the people alone”. Read Lessig’s “Republic Lost” if you question this fact.

  • lugia

    If they value money over their citizens, it only shows how much they truly care about us, their character certainly can be seen and is very transparent.

  • The Lone Gunman

    Remember the Bastille!

  • DKAtoday

    Corp(se)oRATions are not people – bring government back to the people and back to supporting the constitution.

    These are NOT the corp(se)oRAT states of America.

  • Rick Marshall

    America’s politicians are already bought and sold as if they were commodities on Amazon. The last thing we need is a mechanism that makes it even worse.

  • ReverenD

    DO YOUR JOB!!!

  • Wendy Czopp

    This is absurd! Get the private-interest money out, and more people will engage meaningfully in politics. Help us work toward a better, more representative democracy — please!

  • SeattleCynic

    Maybe we embrace it. Let the corporations spend ALL their profits buying votes. They didn’t do so well in the last election. Have we reached a saturation point?

  • Roey

    I don’t believe that the Founding Fathers had a government that is bought and paid for by the highest bidder in mind when they started all this.

  • Caleb

    Citizens United was a horror in of itself when it passed. Passing this type of legislation is detrimental to our country.

  • Adam

    I am frightened of the America you would create by removing the cap on political “contributions”. I beg you to preserve what little space at the table We The People still have left when choosing our representation and influencing their policies. There is no sane, justified way for the Supreme Court to vote any other way.

  • Skywalker425

    The Sith (U.S. Government), believes it’s plan to control the Galaxy (World) is unstoppable and nearly “complete”. But the Rebels (we the People) WILL find the weakness in their Death Star (evil plans) and BLOW. IT. UP (protest)! And then celebrate by dancing in a forest with small furry people (Hobbits).

    Hope you thought that was silly or unnecessary, because that’s what I think about any ruling that you impose that will favor the Corporatocracy that has become America. Listen to the people who have commented here…. we are not blind nor deaf nor dumb to what is happening. So why do you continue to act like YOU are?

  • Sharon Kolor

    Dear Justices, This issue is complicated. It should not be black/white. Maybe there are some situations where corporations must be considered an individual, such as in lawsuits, but to give corporations equal rights with people is wrong. We aren’t all Davids to Goliath corporations. Please keep the playing field level. Thank you. Sharon Kolor, Vero Beach, FL

  • Todd Erickson

    Everyone should know that, eventually, this issue of corruption will likely be resolved. It is only a question of how long it will take, and how extreme the actions taken will need to be to restore a government that is for all of its people.

    Will it start in a few years with a better Congress, or in a century with a revolution?

  • clockworkdemosthenes

    Forget everything for one second, except that oath you swore. To “administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me”.

    Now, you have a system that favors the wealthy in place. They already have undue influence in the selection, and the attentions of “our” elected officials.
    So? Is it time to give them even more?

  • Amy Perrin

    Citizens United should never have been passed. There is so much corruption in American politics these days that I am almost ashamed to be an American. And, we have turned into the laughingstock around the globe. Being poor in a Plutocracy/Oligarchy sucks.

  • Patricia Koehler

    To the Honorable Justices. Please notice that more than 85% of Americans make less than $100k per year and more than 45% of those people make less than enough for their needs; in other words, most Americans are broke more often than not or living from check to check. Fairness does not mean we all get the same. Fairness means that we all get what we need. Please don’t take away 85% of all Americans’ ability to participate when You are not “enjoying” that same reality. You have security and make more than $100k and Your voting/ruling on this issue of maximum donations up to $117k is completely unfair and misuse of Your authority, and completely foreign to most of the whole population You serve. “There are so many better uses of Your time and authority” are the creative thoughts of those of us in the “less than $100k” 85% of us category, and we, those masses, wish with heart and soul, that You hear our complaint as if it matters to You. With respect, Patricia Koehler 93010

  • beholder

    Dear Justices,
    It is up to you. What will be your ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC? Will it be money talks? Or the voice of the people must be heard. You hold in your hands the future of a democratic society. History is not on the side of governments run for the benefit of a tiny elite at the expense of the overwhelming majority. They always self destruct.

  • Owen Johnson

    The power, rights and liberties of the average American are being eroded as it is, by the rich and powerful and corporations. Let’s not exacerbate it by doing away with the last of the campaign finance rules.

  • Citizen1

    There is a trend in our country and all representative governments to allow democracies to be slowly bled of their life’s blood by wealthy individuals who would put our representative governments up for sale. We must resist this with our last ounce of strength. Our young men and women are dying on foreign soils every day. Let them not ask “What and whom do I serve and what am I risking my life for???”.

  • R. Y. Bice

    The Court could actually decide that money is not speech. And the Court itself, rather than a clerk, could decide that corporations are not people. Fat chance.

  • Elizabeth Crum

    To SCOTUS: CItizens United is the core of every economic and social catastrophe in state sand federal elections. They must be stopped and the amendment repealed immediately. It is the duty of the Supreme Court to protect the constitutional rights of ALL citizens of the United States.

  • fillusr

    It’s all part of a concerted plot hatched in the early 70s. The “thanks” go to former SCOTUS justice (and corporate lawyer) Lewis Powell who laid out the strategy to take over the judiciary in his (in)famous memo to the Chamber of Commerce. http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/

  • Dino

    Supreme Court Justices – You know which ones I speak to – your audacity is astounding. You don’t even bother to PRETEND to represent us anymore. Take off your robes and show your corporate suits. You are serving the rich and the corporations, but by doing that you are destroying the backbone and pride of your own country – the middle class.

  • wecandobetter758

    I would agree, except to make it illegal for the Congressperson to see the lobbyist, not the other way round.

    • Outraged

      Not only the Congress member (both Representative and Senator) but also their staff members!

  • Bonnie Jacobson

    Many of us are elderly and poor (I am among that group). We don’t have the means to pay $1,000s of dollars to buy our government’s concern for us. Please, remember that this country was founded on the priniciples of representation for ALL of us, not just representation by the wealthy, for the wealthy. Don’t sell us out to the highest bidder!

  • Patricia Leone

    I totally agree. I also am sick of stupid TV campaign commercials. They spend a fortune on them which is a ridiculous waste of money. Voters shouldn’t base their votes on misleading commercials anyway.

    A lot of big money, not just “rich” people, but lobbyist organizations and corporation money goes into the campaigns, creating a lot of jobs for lobbyists, campaign workers, TV ad men, etc. These are among the groups that don’t want limits on campaign contributions.

  • Pete

    Dear Justices: I believe it is time for a constitutional amendment limited the term of a supreme court justice. I don’t know what our founding fathers were thinking.

  • btwnIIs

    Special interests for sale? really? Is congress serving their country? or serving themselves? We’re nearing a time of outing them on a rail and they, them… fail to realize this. It’s coming to; Us and Them. Congress is insulating themselves from their public ( once a republic ). I hate congress ! there I said it ! I’m guilty of a hate crime. Come get me!

  • Village coot

    First they came for the Indians and took their land but I did not speak out because I was not an Indian.
    Then they came for the Blacks and took their freedom but I did not speak out because I was not Black.
    Then they came for the Immigrants and took their hope but I did not speak out because I was not an Immigrant.
    Then they came for the Workers and their jobs but I did not speak out because it was not my job they took.
    Then they came for the Pensions and Healthcare of millions but I did not speak out because it was not my pension or healthcare they took.
    Then they came for the right to vote, but I did not speak out because I don’t vote.
    Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

  • Marc Lee

    There have ALWAYS been certain congressmembers who’ve spent more time “dialing for dollars” than representing the citizens of their district, but since your disastrous ruling in “Citizens United v. FEC”, this practice has essentially become the rule rather than the exception. The American Meritocracy has been replaced by an Oligarchy, in nearly precise opposition to the expressed intent of the founders as stated in the Constitution. Instead of Lincoln’s “government of the People, by the People, and for the People” you have given us Government of the people, by the wealthy, for the SUPER-wealthy. This is your opportunity to reverse that, and to serve 99% of the public, rather than the wealthiest 1%.

  • Ruby Belle

    LAbelle
    Corruption rears it’s ugly head again, this time with the SCOTUS. Who can we trust anymore? The very people ‘we’ pay exorbitant salaries, benefits, perks, etc to are ruining this country for ‘we’ the people. Should we not start voting to take our country back?

  • kellysnake

    I do not wish to live within a fascist society. Please keep us democratic by lowering the importance of cash and heightening the importance of public opinion.

  • robb

    I myself, and most my age that I talk to, do not trust the government. There’s is little faith in any of it because the entire process is so blatently corrupt. If this is something that matters to you, please take the steps necessary to change it.

  • washbag

    Justices; Please don’t allow the COMPLETE takeover of my government by those with money. Citizens United was a disaster. Don’t complete that by allowing this case to move forward. Remember, OF THE PEOPLE has nothing about MONEY in it ! ! !

  • John

    Another nail in what has become democracy’s coffin.

  • It’smeDawn

    We are a Country where the individual is at war with corporations that are spending obscene amounts of money to buy laws that protect their interests and fill their pockets, not the interests of the the average person. Our Government needs to remember the words of Abraham Lincoln, “government of the people, by the people,
    for the people”
    We are not a government of the corporation, by the corporation, for the corporation. Stop McCutcheon v. FEC now before any more damage is done!

  • doowopbaby

    “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson

    Unfortunately, no real change for democracy takes place in the United States until blood is spilled in the streets because talking through the democratic process has been perverted by bribery, in this case by the corporations. I’m not advocating for violence, it’s just the way it is.

  • richgilmore

    It’s really a shame these justices have no morals. They are supposed to be deciding for the Government of, for and by the people. We have a Oliagarchy in this country “run by the wealthy and corporations” and they dont want you to see it!! and they just ignore “YOU” for their own selfish purposes. We are the people should run the country but WE allow the corporations and wealthy to do it for themselves and not US. One thing for sure is the supreme court justices will all die eventually. When that happens justice will prevail and WE the people will win!!! Being a country that professes on its money “IN GOD WE TRUST” seems to be a lie also because GOD would not allow this injustice either!!! So man is doing this to itself!! Its about time we woke up the 35 and under crowd and get them to vote the conservitives out of office. Remember that “CONSERVATIVISM is SELFISH by definition” just think about the definition in its application. Being a Republican for 30 years disgust me to no end. I am no longer a Repulican an i’m doing all i can to vote for those with Preofressive ideas that help people. When we change the country to what it will eventually be “A Socialized Capitalistic Democracy” for the people, by the people and of the people without capitalists running the country you will see “ALL” people prosper not “ONLY” the wealthy.

  • Charles

    Politicians tell people what they want to hear just to get votes. Then they do what lobyists, donors, and in some cases bribers (not much difference) tell them to do. Then comes spin time to rally the rabble. Taxation without representation is more true today than when the Boston Tea Party was held.

  • Skip

    You are 100% correct,Thank you

  • peggybrayfield

    The idea that Corporations are persons with 1st Amendment Rights is so absurd one can hardly believe that such well-educated and ‘brilliant’ men came up with it. Some of you Justices are said to be dedicated to a strict reading of the Constitution. Well, can you possibly think that our Founders who wrote and added the Bill of Rights to the Constitution had corporations in mind? If so, where in the Federalist Papers, or any contemporary source do you find that idea?
    Each citizen who works for a corporation may use his/her vote, should they choose, to advance what they think is the interest of their corporation through choosing among candidates. That’s how corporate interests can have a legitimate effect on our elections without corruption.
    Just another thought: If money is a form of speech, why isn’t a bribe just another way of talking to one’s elected officials?
    It’s not too late to give the elections back to the American people. Please do it.

  • Dick Myers

    There are 5 of you already known as the Supreme Court Jesters. Except you are far from being funny.

  • Erin

    My father, an attorney, told me that the courts will give people all the justice they can buy. At the time, I disagreed with that cynical assessment of the American judicial system. Now, I agree with my father. Thanks, in large part, to your Citizens United decision, our wonderful democracy is fast becoming a plutocracy! Please, please, don’t make the same mistake with McCutcheon! Restore some of the integrity of the Supreme Court! .

  • james lamb

    Please limit campaign finance spending so big money doesn’t have its way in who gets elected for special interests, and let the American people decide.

  • Kathryn Sonenshine

    If you in fact consider this to be a Democracy still, PLEASE!! REPRESENT THE POEPLE!!! All of us. Not just the Corporations and the wealthy that are trying to
    bleed America dry, and BUYING ELECTIONS – they are trying and, at the moment (thanks to Citizen’s United), SUCEEDING in making a government by the wealthy for the wealthy!! THAT is more like fascism and IS Plutocracy!! Not Democracy!!! Politicians from both sides of the aisle are on the
    record in agreement that The Court’s Citizens United decision created
    nothing short of a disaster! This will be worse: In agreeing to hear McCutcheon v. FEC you are creating possibilities for even MORE GREED and CORRUPTION!!! Have the BACKBONE to DO YOUR JOB TO REPRESENT ALL THE PEOPLE (Corporations are not People!!) OF THE UNITED STATES, AND PROTECT AND UPHOLD OUR DEMOCRACY!!!!

  • Guest

    The corrupt courts don’t care what people think, and don’t care how much they screw over someone. I am living proof of that as I have been fighting a court for four years that’s been trying to hand over a large sum of money of mine to some attorneys. I literally had corruption forced into my life and have been dealing with psychopaths who have shown no guilt, remorse, or empathy for what they were knowingly doing to me. I became so ill from this disease that’s called a judicial system I ended up in the E.R. with internal bleeding and was struggling to stay alive. Now I’m going to sue the hell out of the parasites, along with the attorneys. Judges need to grow some backbones and quit siding with attorneys and taking bribes, which a lot of them do.

  • Ramie

    I already think that the Supreme Court is corrupt and votes in its own interestes, but if this goes through, it would certainly prove it.

    • Patrick Storey

      But the thing is the Supreme Court isn’t supposed to have interests of its own. It is supposed to interpret laws vis-a-vis the framework of the Constitution, and rule in a way that is beneficial to the American public as a whole.

  • Shannon Downey

    Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court – The reasoning in the majority decision for Citizens United was deeply flawed, based on an idealized fantasy. Please take a hard second look and be willing to recognize the abominable reality this decision has wrought.
    I’m from Montana, and this is not about conservative vs. liberal – this is about the highjacking of our political process by wealthy outsiders. It is incumbent on you to protect the ordinary citizen (the “99%”) from plutocracy and corporate tyranny – no less arrogant and evil than was the tyranny of King George. Please do the right thing and uphold the limits on political contributions. Sincerely – Shannon Downey

  • louise

    We the people not we the corporation,

  • Joel Trupin

    The legal sleight of hand that equated a corporation’s voice to that of a citizen in elections has seriously harmed our democratic process. It must not be extended, and should be reversed by whatever means.

  • William J. Adam, Ph.D.

    I implore the Supreme Court to represent the people. All of us. Not just the greedy moneybags trying to bleed America dry. Politicians from both sides of the aisle are on the record in agreement that The Court’s Citizens United decision created nothing short of a disaster. This will be worse.

  • PapaRuss

    My wife and I barely make $117K a year! And we are well off! Our government should not be bought by the very, very well off. Please keep our government of the people, for the people and most of all by ALL OF the people. Thank you.

  • Michael J. Clinton

    What ever happened to “we the people”? Any fool can see the corruption the present campaign system is generating. With one notable exception, I don’t think any of you on the Supreme Court Bench is a fool. What’s the problem here. Wish just one of you had the moxie of a Justice Brennan or a Justice White!

  • Mike Gilbert

    I thought we fought the Revolutionary War to rid our selfs of the system of titles and privlege to replace it with a democracy of “We the People”? Are we suppose to be going backwards? Greed for riches and power seems to have no limit !

  • Crysta

    Republicans want to ensure the dead can vote for them… How else will they keep the power :P

  • Andrew Webb

    Corporations should not be represented in our legislatures (as they were in the early 1900s when California was run by them) and should not be allowed to make financial contributions of any sort to candidates’, initiative, referenda campaigns. This ideal should be enshrined in the Constitution so the Supreme Court can’t meddle with it again.

  • Frank

    If Sheldon Adelman’s $100 million to finance Newt Gingrich’s, and Mitt Romney (and other conservatives) during the past election, isn’t buying government, I don’t know what is. When the current politicians state, that it is ‘only’ granting ‘access’, I can’t believe that politicians think the American People are that gullible. At various times in our history, government used to be a balance to corporate power and influence, today, like in Herbert Hoover’s pre Depression comment, the “business of government is business”…. until business stopped …. like 2007.

  • francesco

    number one rule for fighting corruption: term limits, no more than 2-3 max. Representing people is supposed to be a service, not a profession for enriching oneself!

  • Pollyanna

    Please reconsider your votes on Citizens United and the Right to Vote Act. Surely you can now see how devastating your decisions have been to our Republic. Every adult citizen deserves fair representation. This should still be a country of, by and for the people – not the 2% who’ve grabbed all the wealth through legal scams like Citizens United – aided and abetted by the Supreme Court in decisions going back 100 years to those in favor of corporate “rights.”

  • Bob Graham

    Please reverse the direction where this is heading. Government should be for all people,not just the rich. You’ve already ruled that Corporations have the rights of individual citizens, but isn’t that why you form a Corporation, to avoid any personal responsibility? Of course we could merely vote for whoever has the SMALLEST campaign war chest …

  • JonB

    Please to the right thing and LIMIT CONTRIBUTIONS. Please do the right thing and understand how corrupt we will become if this path is allowed to continue. We may never be able to make the country right again. Thank you

  • Anybody

    Got a bad feeling that this is just a honey pot.

  • Cubbie

    Unless and until a ‘corporation’ can be jailed for doing illegal things, they are not ‘people’ and should not be allowed to help make the rules and unduly influence our so-called lawmakers. These congress members spend their whole terms working to get money for the next election and don’t even read the bills they vote on. They just vote the way big money tells them. They should be responsible to the voters in their districts.

  • a voter

    dear justices…please realize most people in this country are middle class or lower.we DO NOT NEED big money in our government!!! just remember the late 1800s when all the big businesses tried to influence our government.didnt work out then either!

  • http://www.facebook.com/bill.costley.796 Bill Costley

    A corporation is no longer an individual when it ‘speaks’ millions of dollars.

  • cryofpaine

    We can’t rely on the people who are benefiting from corruption to stop corruption. The only way to change it is if we work together to vote these people out of office and replace them with people who will do the right thing. The only way that can happen is if we create a third, neutral party, one specifically and only dedicated to ending corruption in government.

    Right now, the political cults have done a brilliant job of creating a divide to prevent that kind of cooperation. They have their followers terrified of what would happen if one of “them” got into power. Each side believes that the other is going to be the destruction of the country, and that they have a moral imperative to prevent the other side from winning, at all costs. So we fight over comparatively minor issues like abortion or gay marriage while politicians work in secret to benefit themselves and their corporate pals, passing legislation like this while keeping the rest of the country bottlenecked with these petty issues.

    In the new party, anyone who runs signs a legally binding contract that they will only support specific legislation, and that any other legislation that is necessary for running the country will only last as long as the shortest term limit. That way, nothing they do will have a lasting effect on anything other than corruption, so you can vote for someone who holds an opposing view on a topic that you are passionate about, knowing that they have contracted that they will not take any action on that issue that would have a lasting effect. A democrat could vote for someone who is anti-abortion, and a republican could vote for someone who is pro-gun control, without fear that they would take the opportunity to advance those issues.

    As for what legislation to pass:

    A constitutional amendment limiting the rights of corporations, and specifically denying them the same status as an individual, thus overturning SCOTUS’ ruling in citizens united.

    A constitutional amendment drastically limiting campaign contributions. An individual can contribute up to a reasonable limit (say 2000 per office per year). An organization cannot contribute anything. Contribution limits are across office, not per candidate. So if you want to try and buy the presidency no matter who is in office, you have a limit of 1000 per candidate (in a 2 candidate race). If you want to try and buy the senate, you are limited to 10 dollars per candidate (in a 2 candidate race for every senate position). If you want to try and buy the house, you’re limited to about a buck and change per candidate.
    A constitutional amendment making it illegal for those in public office (political or judicial) to take any form of favor or compensation from anyone who they have benefited either during or after their time in office. For instance, If a legislator enacted a law which benefited a specific company, that company cannot hire that individual once they are out of office.

    Enacting a maximum wage. The wealthiest 1% have 300 times the combined wealth of the lowest 80% of the population. A reasonable maximum wage would allow more of that wealth to be distributed throughout the rest of the employees, where a minimum wage simply means passing those costs on to consumers, or hiring less workers. A combination of both a minimum and maximum wage creates reasonable distribution of profits within a company.

    Redefinition (or rather a restoration) of what patents and copyrights are and how they work. A patent would have to be specific, to the point where someone reading the patent could exactly reproduce the item being protected, including specific source code, circuit diagrams, mechanical diagrams, etc. No more patenting of concepts. Both patents and copyrights would be limited to a reasonable time, restoring their original intent to protect creators and give them a monopoly during which they can profit from their creations, since any competition wouldn’t have the added development costs, so they could undersell the creator. Once they have had the time to recoup those costs and make a profit, the patent or copyright expires, and becomes public domain. In addition, only the original creator or someone actively producing items based on those patents or copyrights would be allowed to hold them. No more patent trolls.

    It’s time to restore the power to the people, and knock corporations and politicians down several pegs.

  • Neeraj Rajasekar

    Justices, your logic about money as speech is completely flawed. Remember, in a democracy, one individual cannot have more “free speech” than any other, right? After all, free speech is a human characteristic and is respected as a right, but not a quantifiable skill wherein one can be more “Free speechy” than another. Yet, by making money speech, you have made one individual more “free speechy” than another. A democracy that places one individual’s democratic rights on a scale that makes that person’s rights more valuable, utilizable, and powerful than another’s rights is not a democracy. Equality for all means I, as a man living relatively close to the poverty line, should not be less capable of being an effective agent within a democratic system than a man with millions of dollars, but lo and behold the state we’ve come to now…

  • Harris F Skillie Sr

    Supreme Court Judges: We are all expecting Justice in this case. Do the right thing for all US citizens.

  • BudgieWarrior

    We can’t afford to enshrine bribery in America’s political system. Remember, bribery is second only to treason in the Constitution’s mention of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ for which politicians and judges can (and should) be impeached when they commit them. Citizens United vs. FEC set a dangerous precedent. Even the Supreme Court judges who approved ‘dark money’ as speech and corporations as people should realize they are not above the law!

  • Sean Streeter

    Dear Justices: It is long past time for you to recognize that your decisions have been paramount in changing our government to be a government by the Corporations, of the Corporations and for the Corporations. Please do something to help restore my faith in our government.

  • Jane domes

    If the wealthy are the only people that have there concerns addressed let them pay the taxes.Theres no longer representation for the working class.All of the sell outs in govt ought to rot in hell.How do people live with themselves.

  • VotesDontCountMoneyDoes

    Citizens United successfully changed this country from “one person, one vote” to “one dollar, one vote”… if you drag us down this path any further, the people WILL rebel and you’ll witness the fall of a great nation – history has proven that. There are still more of us than there are of you, no matter how many “votes” you get.

  • mark

    It was the wealthy burocrates of England that made people start this country and leave England in the first place! Now with even $117000 cap on individual donations is catering to the rich, after all if the mean income is $40k per person, who is it that can afford a $117k contribution every two years to one individual? Those with agendas that have something to gain with favors from government officials!

  • Julie77

    Please consider The People when you are making your decision on this case. We notice that our democracy is being taken over by Big Money, and we are furious about it. We The People want to put a stop to this and if our public servants choose to allow further corruption of our democracy, it will be clear to us that those elected officials do not work in the best interests of The People, but for Big Money. We do not agree that corporations are people, they are made up of people with individual votes. Giving corporations a louder voice by allowing them to use obscene amounts money to control our elections, public servants, and legislation displaces the intended equality of American democracy. Your decision on this case will either strengthen our democracy or aid the transformation of our democracy to an oligarchy. When deciding this case, please be moral. Remember the values of our country and the constitutional rights of The People.

  • Fayann Stone

    Giving corporate America free hand in giving money to candidates, leaves us poor TAX PAYING subjects at a tremendous disadvantage to select people to really represent us instead of money. Do NOT consider McCutcheon vs FEC as anything but giving us less and less say in what should be a democracy for the people, of the people, and by the people. (Sound familiar? I hope so !)

  • doc watson

    Corporations are not people. and campaign donations are not free speech. If they were, then the constitution would guarantee the rich more free speech than the rest of us. And would guarantee corporations more free speech than humans. Donations must be limited to avoid the concentration of wealth and power to a degree that strangles democracy.

  • dfloydr

    Political contributions should be limited in amount and it should be a severe legal violation, with consequences, to accept a contribution from any contributor who can not actually go to the polls and vote for you. Out of State and out of District contributors buying off local elections with huge contributions hardly smells of any kind of democracy.

  • Trish

    WE are supposed to be represented not just the WEALTHY. Bribes/lobbyist should be done away with.

  • Improvor

    It’s hard enough to afford my bills and needs. I cannot afford the corruption we are doing to ourselves. It is time for us to please change our course before it is too late. Thank you.

  • Mike

    citizen’s united argued that corporations are people. There is a cap, I think $5000 on personal “contributions” (ie bribes) Therefore corporations & physical people should all be limited to this amount. Thereby equalizing all free speech / influence.

    I believe campaigns, like the election itself should be paid for with tax dollars, not with bribes.

  • Mollie

    Please do the sensible and responsible thing and turn this down!! Americans of every tax bracket need to be represented!!

  • Guest

    The U.S. has fallen behind much of the Western world when it comes to
    phone, cable and Internet service. Americans actually pay much more for
    inferior service compared to their global counterparts.

    In his new book, The Fine Print: How Big Companies Use ‘Plain English’ to Rob You Blind, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter David Cay Johnston highlights these astounding facts:

    Americans pay four times as much as the French for an Internet
    triple-play package—phone, cable TV and Internet—at an average of $160
    per month versus $38 per month.

    The French get global free calling and worldwide live television.
    Their Internet is also 10 times faster at downloading information and 20
    times faster uploading it.

    America has gone from #1 in Internet speed (when we invented it) to 29th in the world and falling.

    Bulgaria is among the countries with faster Internet service.

    Americans pay 38 times as much as the Japanese for Internet data.

    Since the mid-1970′s when Ma Bell was cited as holding a monopoly
    over phone service, Americans have been told more competition would
    lower their phone bill. But the promise of lower prices has actually led
    to higher prices, says Johnston.

    In his book, he tells of a woman who in 1984 paid $9.51 for her local phone service. He writes:

    “By 2003 her bill had swollen fourfold to $38.90. In the
    two decades since the breakup of the AT&T monopoly, even after
    adjusting for inflation, [her] telephone cost $2.30 for each dollar paid
    in 1984. And that was without any charges for long-distance calls.”

    Not only have prices increased, phone service providers now charge
    fees for everything, including options that used to be free, such as
    directory service. Bills have also become increasingly complicated. A
    poll of 1,000 people found that only three people actually knew how to
    read their statement. That means virtually no one understands their
    phone bill in its entirety.

    Of cable service Johnston writes:

    “Since 1995, average cable prices have been rising 2.6 times faster
    than the cost of living, reaching an average of almost $53 a month for
    basic, no frill service in 2009, FCC reports show….

    According to SNL Kagan, a market research firm, the average cable
    bill in 2011 was $78, almost double the price of $40 in 2001 and
    significantly higher than the FCC figure.

    How did this happen?

    “The telecos got the rules changed while we weren’t watching,” says
    Johnston in the accompanying interview. Basically, the phone and cable
    companies lobbied Washington to change laws and regulations to favor
    their business over their customers.

    And remember the so-called “Information Superhighway”?

    Over the course of the last 20 years, nearly $500 billion has been
    collected by the telecom companies to (allegedly) bring America into the
    21st century with an “Information Superhighway,” says Johnston. That
    works out ot $3,000 per household to have access to high-speed Internet.

    But America did not get what it was promised and much of the country
    will never get fiber optic lines, Johnston tells The Daily Ticker. And
    even in cities that do have the faster service, the service is not
    always accessible.

    “This is terrible for commerce and our economic future,” says
    Johnston, adding that our global competitors are investing in the proper
    infrastructure.

    “The companies essentially have a business model that is antithetical
    to economic growth,” he says. “Profits go up if they can provide slow
    Internet at super high prices.”

    The relationship between phone and cable providers has essentially
    become a cartel, says Johnston, who cites the relationship between
    Verizon and Comcast.

    He writes:

    Verizon announced in 2008 that it would stop building out its FiOS
    (fiber-optic system) once it reaches about 16 million of America’s 100
    million households….

    Instead, it has made deals with Comcast to sell its services using
    Comcast cables. Verizon said it anticipates similar deals with other
    cable providers to sell of their systems.

    In terms of phone service, what America really got was a duopoly,
    says Johnston, noting that AT&T and Verizon control 60% of phone
    service in America.

  • Nader

    EXAMPLE OF MONEY IN POLITICS :

    Why Your Phone, Cable & Internet Bills Cost So Much in America ?

    The U.S. has fallen behind much of the Western world when it comes to
    phone, cable and Internet service. Americans actually pay much more for
    inferior service compared to their global counterparts.

    In his new book, The Fine Print: How Big Companies Use ‘Plain
    English’ to Rob You Blind, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter David Cay
    Johnston highlights these astounding facts:

    Americans pay four times as much as the French for an Internet
    triple-play package—phone, cable TV and Internet—at an average of $160
    per month versus $38 per month.

    The French get global free calling and worldwide live television.
    Their Internet is also 10 times faster at downloading information and 20
    times faster uploading it.

    America has gone from #1 in Internet speed (when we invented it) to 29th in the world and falling.

    Bulgaria(a poor country) is among the countries with faster Internet service than the United States.

    Americans pay 38 times as much as the Japanese for Internet data.

    Since the mid-1970′s when Ma Bell was cited as holding a monopoly
    over phone service, Americans have been told more competition would
    lower their phone bill. But the promise of lower prices has actually led
    to higher prices, says Johnston.

    In his book, he tells of a woman who in 1984 paid $9.51 for her local phone service. He writes:

    “By 2003 her bill had swollen fourfold to $38.90. In the two
    decades since the breakup of the AT&T monopoly, even after adjusting
    for inflation, [her] telephone cost $2.30 for each dollar paid in 1984.
    And that was without any charges for long-distance calls.”

    Not only have prices increased, phone service providers now charge
    fees for everything, including options that used to be free, such as
    directory service. Bills have also become increasingly complicated. A
    poll of 1,000 people found that only three people actually knew how to
    read their statement. That means virtually no one understands their
    phone bill in its entirety.

    Of cable service Johnston writes:

    “Since 1995, average cable prices have been rising 2.6 times
    faster than the cost of living, reaching an average of almost $53 a
    month for basic, no frill service in 2009, FCC reports show….

    According to SNL Kagan, a market research firm, the average cable
    bill in 2011 was $78, almost double the price of $40 in 2001 and
    significantly higher than the FCC figure.

    How did this happen?

    “The telecos got the rules changed while we weren’t watching,” says
    Johnston in the accompanying interview. Basically, the phone and cable
    companies lobbied Washington to change laws and regulations to favor
    their business over their customers.

    And remember the so-called “Information Superhighway”?

    Over the course of the last 20 years, nearly $500 billion has been
    collected by the telecom companies to (allegedly) bring America into the
    21st century with an “Information Superhighway,” says Johnston. That
    works out ot $3,000 per household to have access to high-speed Internet.

    But America did not get what it was promised and much of the country
    will never get fiber optic lines, Johnston tells The Daily Ticker. And
    even in cities that do have the faster service, the service is not
    always accessible.

    “This is terrible for commerce and our economic future,” says
    Johnston, adding that our global competitors are investing in the proper
    infrastructure.

    “The companies essentially have a business model that is antithetical
    to economic growth,” he says. “Profits go up if they can provide slow
    Internet at super high prices.”

    The relationship between phone and cable providers has essentially
    become a cartel, says Johnston, who cites the relationship between
    Verizon and Comcast.

    He writes:

    Verizon announced in 2008 that it would stop building out its
    FiOS (fiber-optic system) once it reaches about 16 million of America’s
    100 million households….

    Instead, it has made deals with Comcast to sell its services
    using Comcast cables. Verizon said it anticipates similar deals with
    other cable providers to sell of their systems.

    In terms of phone service, what America really got was a duopoly,
    says Johnston, noting that AT&T and Verizon control 60% of phone
    service in America.

  • Michael Strickland

    Dear Honorable Supreme Justices,

    It is important for all Americans to understand the importance of making political contributions. I believe this includes individuals as well as corporations who have a financial stake in the outcome of local, state and federal elections. We all may have something to gain or lose based on candidates who ultimately win an election and go on to sponsor and support legislation in our government.

    Providing funding to these candidates is also an essential part of our political process. With contributions we can have a pre-election voice about which candidates represent the best progress and future for our country. However, if our biggest voice is our vote and the candidates who are seeking office align themselves with corporations, PACs or even very wealthy individuals who provide unlimited funding for a candidate campaigns, how can our voice be expected to carry any weight? The idea of unlimited campaign funding by any person or group skews the ability for all candidates to have their message and ideas communicated in a fair and equal manner and without bias.

    The election process cannot be allowed to be swayed by a “media blitz” for only the best-funded candidates. As voters we need to see the qualifications and ideals on all candidates equally. Supporting or making a law or setting any precedent that allows unlimited financial support of any candidate or group is not in the best interest of any American and certainly not in the spirit of the constitutional protection allowed for all citizens.

    Please provide equal opportunities for all candidates by not opening up campaign contributions to an unlimited amount.

    Respectfully,
    Michael Strickland
    U.S. Citizen

  • Rich Purtell

    This is absolutely insane. Special interests and lobbyists have too much control of Washington and an effective means to correct this is to reduce campaign contribution limits, not raise them.

  • Virginia G.

    The effect of big $ ‘buying’ campaigns is a disaster and s/b illegal. The ability of our representatives and congressman to make independent, intelligent, well thought out choices should benefit the people of the United States and not big business and the wealthy. Again, this s/b illegal and punishable by huge fines, jail or both. It’s time to take our country back!

don't show this againclose foreverclose forever× Hey there. Want to help us out? Like our Facebook page:Like us on Facebook:Like on FB