Hank Sanders: Senate Sketches #1493: Is democracy dying on the vines in the United States?

  Is democracy dying on the vines in these United States of America? There are some pervasive signs. My one vote won’t make a difference. My vote doesn’t count. Voting doesn’t change anything. The situation raises the question: is democracy dying on the vines in these United States of America?

  In President Barack Obama’s final State of the Union address, he said, “Most of all, democracy breaks down when the average person feels their voice doesn’t matter; that the system is rigged in favor of the rich or the powerful or some narrow interest.” Is democracy dying on the vines?

Elizabeth Robinson: Business owners denied First Amendment protections

  On November 19th, U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton ruled that Hobby Lobby, the arts and crafts chain, and other for-profit companies must pay for the coverage of contraceptives such as birth control, the “morning-after pill” and the “week-after pill,” regardless of the religious convictions of the owners. In his ruling denying an injunction on certain provisions of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), Judge Heaton said “…the court has not found [that]… for-profit companies such as Hobby Lobby and Mardel have a constitutional right to the free exercise of religion.”

Gene Policinski: True effect of big campaign spending unclear

WASHINGTON — There’s one result from the election that we likely won’t know for months or even years: the full meaning of this year’s massive run-up in campaign spending.

  The U.S. Supreme Court, in its Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision in 2010, freed corporations, unions and others to spend as much on elections as they wish — setting up the circumstances for the financial version of Superstorm Sandy in this year’s races.

  The Court voted 5-4 that limits on corporate spending violated First Amendment political free-speech rights. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, said there was “no basis for the proposition that, in the context of political speech, the Government may impose restrictions on certain disfavored speakers.”

Gene Policinski: What was right about high court’s Montana ruling

  Amid the flap over what was supposedly wrong the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last week to throw out Montana’s 100-year-old campaign-spending limits, can we take a moment to consider what was right about it?

  The Court held 5-4 that Montana may not continue to limit what corporations and unions may spend in support of or opposition to a political candidate. Some are calling the ruling “Citizen’s United 2,” in a nod to the landmark Citizens United v. FEC decision that dumped such limits for federal elections. That 2010 ruling said it was a violation of the First Amendment’s protection of free speech to restrict such spending.

Sheldon Richman: How to get money out of politics

  Watching the television pundits fret over campaign finance is amusing, because the solution to their problem is right under their noses. They just don’t want to see it.

  The pundits’ favorite phrase that stands for everything evil in the political system is Citizens United. That’s the nonprofit corporation that sued the government in 2008 when it was told that commercials for its anti–Hillary Clinton documentary couldn’t be shown close to a Democrat primary election without violating McCain–Feingold, the latest campaign-finance law. The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled that section of the law unconstitutional.