tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5131909766460602337.post3225951245406676169..comments2023-11-05T03:47:11.804-05:00Comments on Now At The Podium: How Many Times Can I Get Twisted on This Issue?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5131909766460602337.post-7982349564766520022010-01-29T10:47:46.568-05:002010-01-29T10:47:46.568-05:00I've come across this commentary that I though...I've come across this commentary that I thought was pretty thought provoking. Thought you'd appreciate it.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.fff.org/comment/com1001i.asp" rel="nofollow">The Only Way to Get Money out of Politics</a>zenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00331792051673270478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5131909766460602337.post-57784969669976226302010-01-29T10:26:47.730-05:002010-01-29T10:26:47.730-05:00Because there is not clarity on the issue, we have...Because there is not clarity on the issue, we have potentional problems. I wouldn't so easily dismiss the possibility of foreign money entering US elections.<br /><br /><a rel="nofollow">The ruling affirms that corporations, like individuals, have a free-speech right to spend unlimited amounts from their general treasuries on ad campaigns that support or oppose political candidates. It's true that foreign nationals are currently prohibited by law from making independent expenditures in U.S. elections. But that prohibition has little teeth. <b>According to experts, it doesn't apply to foreign-owned corporations that incorporate in the U.S., or have U.S. subsidiaries -- meaning most foreign multinationals likely aren't covered. So there's "essentially no difference" between domestic and foreign corporations in terms of their ability to pump money into U.S. elections</b>, says Lisa Gilbert of U.S. PIRG -- a view backed by several other advocates of increased regulation.</a>zenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00331792051673270478noreply@blogger.com