[sterlingice]

"The nation's campaign finance laws date back to the early 1900s, an era of freewheeling corporate monopolies and uninhibited corporate influence in politics."
-Ah, yes, so different from today

"Olson maintains that corporations are individuals, in a constitutional sense, and should be able to express their views. Money, he says, is speech."
-I've never understood both parts of this line of reasoning. One, how does money guarantee free speech? And how did we get to such a corrupt point where a corporation is entitled to the same protections under the law as an individual person?

This is one of those rulings that scares me. I've long maintained that the biggest single way to "clean up" Washington would be publicly funded elections or, at the very least, extremely strict caps on election spending.

It's also the type of thing that frustrates me about America these days. It's such a huge, important case that people will look back on years from now but you can't get people to pay attention to now because they don't understand the gravity of it. This is the type of thing CNN should be covering with wall-to-wall news instead of whatever some non-celebrity is doing or some missing white woman but people just don't understand the gravity of the situation.

SI