Shortcuts

Connect with us on Facebook!
Subscribe.
[Feeds & Readers]
Follow us on Twitter!

Make us your home page!
Authors, sign in!

Recommend Our Site!

You can use this handy tool to send emails to people you'd like to recommend this site to. We assure you that their email addresses will never be shared or even stored. Your privacy is 100% protected.

Just fill in the blanks and send your email! It's easy.

Their names here:
Their email:
Your name:

Main

Front Page » Table of Contents » Election & Campaign Ethics

By Angelo Lopez on November 24, 2010


For the past few years, I've been bothered by the strong influence that corporations and their lobbyists have had in our political system. It seems that these corporations are able to spend large amounts of money to insure that only their voices are heard in the halls of government. While many Tea Party members are worried about an encroaching big government, I share with many progressives a different worry about the growing power of corporations over our politics and personal choices. So last Summer I decided to attend a rally to limit corporate lobbying and sponsorship of politicians in Washington D.C. and to advocate the public financing of elections in front of San Jose's City Hall. Along with this blog are photos I took of the event.

Read more of this post here ...

By Paul Faber on January 23, 2010

The Supreme Court's recent decision--the January 21 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission to allow corporate "persons" to spend as much as they want in the name of free speech--has the potential to undermine democracy. After all, democracy truly works only when people examine the relevant information and make rational decisions based on that information. Advertising, twisting the news, and creating certain appearances can distort the information and short-circuit our ability to make rational decisions. These take money--lots of it--so the corporation that can promise lots of money to a candidate can really influence any election.

The decision may undermine democracy, but it doesn't have to. We ought to start working right now along a couple of different paths.

Read more of this post here ...

By Bruce Fealk on January 21, 2010


In what is a very sad day for the United States of America, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that corporations have the right of free speech and can give unlimited amounts of money to political campaigns.

Mark today down in your calendar as a day that America changed forever, from one theoretically controlled by the will of the people to one controlled by corporations, both American and foreign owned.

We must fight back. Please add your name to the petition. Click here.

Read more of this post here ...

By Mikyung Lim on December 31, 2009

As we are waiting for the final bloody battle of health care reform, the final stage of compromising between the “House” and senate bills, I wish you (if you hadn’t read it yet) to read Professor Dreier’s blog Waffling Democrats’ Health Care Hypocrisy. Dr. Dreier educates us on how “Bribed” Senators Joe Lieberman, Max Baucus, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln and Kent Conrad discriminate the US public against military service men and veterans. These senators supported to provide “Public Plan” to military service men and veterans in the name of Veterans Administration (VA), but fight hard against providing the same “Public Plan” to us “the Public”? Why, on earth, do they have this right of discriminating the US population based on whether they are in military uniform or not?

Read more of this post here ...

By Sarah Burris on March 27, 2009

We've worked so hard to help students have equal access to voting its rewarding to have it reintroduced into a legislature that will see it as a priority. As we speak in Washington there is a press conference announcing its importance and emphasizing the difficulties that young people face simply in casting a ballot each election.

According to a release from the Student Association for Voter Empowerment...

Read more of this post here ...

By Levi Henry on March 9, 2009

My Grandfather used to say with some frequency towards the end of his long 82 years that Hosted by RockYouPhotos.com“it’s a modern world.” Boy, was he ever right—there are black bears in northwest Missouri, just a county away from my own; deer, those terribly dangerous creatures, have invaded the Kansas City metro, with a Kansas legislator proposing an open bow season within a densely populated park within Shawnee Mission; and a new hunting season is open on unitemized internet campaign contributions over the amount of $5,000.00, though a similar requirement wouldn’t exist if it were raised through a small, local fundraiser where the aggregate of unitemized contributions received were over $5,000.00.

Read more of this post here ...

By Zola Jones on December 4, 2008

"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President..."
Many of us are still reeling in disgust over the Supreme Court's inappropriate interference in the Presidential election in 2000. Most of us continue to believe that the judiciary branch had no business crowning King George W. Bush as our president. We've suffered (barely survived) through the eight years hence.

What now? Supreme Court Justice (and right wing zealot) Clarence Thomas just can't keep his hands off of our elections. This from Afro-American:

In a highly unusual move, U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has asked his colleagues on the court to consider the request of an East Brunswick, N.J. attorney who has filed a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama’s status as a United States citizen.

Read more of this post here ...

By Gerald Britt on November 1, 2008

Whoever wins this election next Tuesday, there is one thing that is almost certain to dominate the discussion about electoral politics on a national level: unprecedented massive amounts of money!

However, while recent national politics has had a focus on money and campaign reform, the emphasis has been on the influence of corporate money in elections. Almost all of us have bemoaned the fact that 'big money interests' have shut out the average American citizen's concern - to the point where, it had come to be believed that there is no way possible that citizens can have any credible influence because no 'ordinary Joe' (no I'm not going to say it!), can make that type of contribution.

Not this year!

Read more of this post here ...

By Pamela Jean on October 25, 2008

You may remember last spring that John McCain first found himself in hot water over his handling of campaign finances. McCain had barreled past campaign spending limits mandated by his original acceptance of public campaign funding. Also, though he made many speeches about his sincerest desire to withdraw from public campaign financing, he couldn't because McCain had used the promise of public funding to secure his campaign loans. See, McCain struck a deal with his bank - he promised to only commit to using the public funding system if he lost the primary. In that event, the $5.8 million would still be waiting for him. On the other hand, if he won the primary, as he hoped to do, he would opt out of the public finance program altogether (he thought). At that point, though he would have been clearly deceptive to his bank (and all of us), he figured that all would be well because he'd be even more ready to pay the bank back with the private donation funds that would pour in.

Some readers may admire that as a shrewd strategy. Sounds kind of smart, right? Still, when most Americans take the time to understand what he was doing, it's likely they'll see McCain's canniness for what it was - trickery. Whether it was silly, desperate or unethical is debatable. There's one point we will all have to agree on - McCain attempted to game the system.

This week, brand new allegations continue to surface accusing McCain of cheating campaign finance laws...

Read more of this post here ...

By Gerald Britt on October 23, 2008

This week's question for the Dallas Morning News' Texas Faith panel of clergy is a challenging one:

The Catholic bishops in Dallas and Fort Worth co-wrote a letter read from church pulpits this month. The letter said: "To vote for a candidate who supports the intrinsic evil of abortion or "abortion rights" when there is a morally acceptable alternative would be to cooperate in the evil - and, therefore, morally impermissible." Some local Catholics took that as a de facto endorsement of John McCain, given the positions that he and Barack Obama take on abortion.

Here's the question: Were the bishops offering appropriate moral guidance based on Catholic dogma? Or did they cross a line either from a theological or constitutional perspective? Should clergy offer such specific guidance on issues of political importance that clearly benefit a particular candidate or political party? (Texas Faith: Politics and Abortion)

Read more of this post here ...

More blog posts in this same category:

Want to see more blog posts in this same category, Election & Campaign Ethics? We have more! By default, this page only lists a few of the most recent entries. It's likely that we have many more blog posts under this same category. Nearly all of the posts that our authors publish are very timeless and relevant, regardless of when the articles are published.

We encourage and welcome you to look back through our archives for Election & Campaign Ethics. They are all listed right here on the right side of this page.

To see the rest of our entries in this same category, Election & Campaign Ethics, just click on any of the months shown in the right sidebar. This will bring up pages of all entries in this same category posted in that month and year.


Our sponsors help us stay online to serve you. Thank you for doing your part! By using the specific links below to start any of your online shopping, you are making a tremendous difference. By using the links below, you are directly helping to support this community website:

If you want to browse other topics, you can also check our Table of Contents or go back to our Front Page. Stick around awhile! We're glad you're here.


Browse the Blogs!

You are Here!

This is the main page for the category of Election & Campaign Ethics.

Education & Learning is the previous chapter. Energy Costs & Policies is the next chapter in our Table of Contents.

The most recent entries posted to Everyday Citizen under this heading of Election & Campaign Ethics are shown here.

To see more entries in this same category, we have all archives for Election & Campaign Ethics listed below by month and year.

The most current posts can always be found on our Front Page.

Archives for this Category:
Election & Campaign Ethics

Visit our friends!

Books You Might Like!

Notices & Policies

All of the Everyday Citizen authors are delighted you are here. We all hope that you come back often, leave us comments, and become an active part of our community. Welcome!

All of our contributing authors are credentialed by invitation only from the editor/publisher of EverydayCitizen.com. If you are visiting and are interested in writing here, please feel free to let us know.

For complete site policies, including privacy, see our Frequently Asked Questions. This site is designed, maintained, and owned by its publisher, Everyday Citizen Media. EverydayCitizen.com, The Everyday Citizen, everydaycitizens.com, and Everyday Citizen are trademarked names.

Each of the authors here retain their own copyrights for their original written works, original photographs and art works. Our authors also welcome and encourage readers to copy, reference or quote from the content of their blog postings, provided that the content reprints include obvious author or website attribution and/or links to their original postings, in accordance with this website's Creative Commons License.

© Copyright, 2007-2011, All rights reserved, unless otherwise specified, first by each the respective authors of each of their own individual blogs and works, and then by the editor and publisher for any otherwise unreserved and all other content. Our editor primarily reviews blogs for spelling, grammar, punctuation and formatting and is not liable or responsible for the opinions expressed by individual authors. The opinions and accuracy of information in the individual blog posts on this site are the sole responsibility of each of the individual authors.