re: #187 Fozzie Bear

I would be happy with mandatory full disclosure for all contributions, personal or corporate, over a certain relatively low dollar amount, either to candidates or to issue groups.

However, the Citizen’s United ruling means that such a law would now be considered an unconstitutional infringement of the first amendment. How spending money to buy propaganda to influence elections became legally synonymous with having a conversation in your own home will never make sense to me.

If you want to be really pissed off, read about Clarence Thomas’ wife’s recent activities, and contemplate that her husband’s decision directly financially benefits both of them.

Good points.

However, is Thomas Clarence’s wife a public figure? Is her position one of influence? How far do we go? Are spouses of campaign contributing corporate CEO’s public figures? How about the spouses of unions leaders who distribute campaign funds- are they too public figures?

I do agree the question is loaded. I don’t have the answers, but no matter, really. No resolution will satisfy all the interested parties.