Republicans earlier this week succeeded in their effort to filibuster the Disclose Act, which would have required corporations and unions that produced political campaign ads to disclose their involvement. The bill passed easily in the House of Representatives, but progressives in the Senate could muster only 57 members. The 40 Republican senators who represent barely a third of the nation's population managed to defeat a bill supported by a clear majority in both houses.
Reading about the vote in the mainstream media, one could easily be forgiven not only for failing to understand this fundamental fact -- that the will of an overwhelming majority of Americans was thwarted by an intransigent minority eager to see anonymous corporate campaign ads bolster their party's political fortunes later this year -- but also for why the vote mattered to anyone but partisan politicians.
According to The Hill's headline , for instance, the Disclose Act should be seen "as balm to soothe left." The body of the article explains that "Democratic leaders hope to rally their rank-and-file troops this week by dealing with controversial campaign finance legislation just before lawmakers hit the campaign trail," then adds: "Liberal voters, who have grumbled over a litany of failures and legislative compromises that have hurt the left's agenda, will be crucial to Democratic hopes in November."
Similarly, the coverage in the Washington Post and Politico harped on the partisan political angles over the consequences of the vote to our democratic institutions. In this respect they reflected virtually the same spin offered by the extremist right-wing editorial pages of The Wall Street Journal, which complain of "a blatantly partisan bill sponsored by two Members whose main duty is electing Democrats."
To continue reading, please go here.
Follow Eric Alterman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Eric_Alterman
Thank you.
Their hearts break to see that corporations have more personhood than they do, that their own carefully crafted words fall on ears that hear less than their own, and that their own voices are no longer heard.
Their dry dead eyes weep.
As a voter, being able to "follow-the-money," was one of the best tools available. This "gift" to corporations by the Supreme Court decision is a significant blow to the kind of information important to voters within an representative system of governance.
It used to be said that "Money talks and bullsh*t walks." Thanks to the Supreme Court, the new version is.."Corporate Money talks and democracy walks."