Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (554201)	3/10/2010 6:44:50 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1586371

Current federal law (2 U.S.C. 441e(b)(3)) prevents "a partnership, association, corporation, organization, or other combination of persons organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country" from making "directly or indirectly" a donation or expenditure "in connection with a Federal, State, or local election," to a political party committee or "for an electioneering communication." The subject USSC ruling stated specifically that it was not ruling on or changing this law. Thank you for that reference. In his SOTU Obama said he thinks that the new ruling might allow foreign influence in our elections....emphasis on 'thinks'. Alito adamantly believes otherwise. However, in the discussion I read, there is a potential loophole that could allow foreign participation. That's why its believed this matter won't be resolved until its tested in a court case. But setting aside the issue of foreign influence, the USSC has set a very undemocratic precedent with their ruling re. corps and their involvement in elections. A very disturbing precedent.....that I promise you will be fought.