I’m suggesting that no company be allowed to donate to political campaigns.
And I think the ruling that corps can donate “because they are people” is totally not within the spirit of why corps were first created in the first place. They were created to protect REAL people from financial liability if their business failed at the cost of being double taxed. They were never intended to have a say in politics and/or government.
Ron Paul justifies the spending earmarks he puts into bills by saying he’s just returning money that was taken from tax payers.
You could easily apply the same logic here.
So are you suggesting that once a company has been bailed out it should no longer be allowed to donate to political campaigns?
That would be in violation of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 2010.
Are you ever not annoying?
I’m suggesting that no company be allowed to donate to political campaigns.
And I think the ruling that corps can donate “because they are people” is totally not within the spirit of why corps were first created in the first place. They were created to protect REAL people from financial liability if their business failed at the cost of being double taxed. They were never intended to have a say in politics and/or government.