Snark: to annoy or irritate

"Snark" has been in English language dictionaries since at least 1906, and Lewis Carroll used the word to describe a mythological animal in his poem, The Hunting of the Snark (1874). Most recently, the word has come to characterize snappish, sarcastic, or mean-spirited comments or actions directed at those who annoy or irritate us.

At first, this blog was just going be a place to gripe, but because it's more satisfying to take action than it is to merely complain, now most of the posts/reposts suggest ways to get involved in solving problems.


There was an error in this gadget

Friday, May 4, 2012

Fight Citizens United

Fight Citizens United!The U.S. Supreme Court's disastrous Citizens United v. FEC ruling has allowed corporate CEOs to unleash a torrent of secret corporate spending into our political system.

Indefensibly, CEOs are able to keep both the public and their own shareholders in the dark about the use of company funds for political ends.
This give CEOs free rein to make political expenditures that they would never be able to justify publicly — including campaigns so toxic they would inevitably tarnish the company's brand were the funding source made public.
And the results have been absolutely corrosive to our democracy.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which is a federal agency, can require publicly traded companies to disclose the money they spend on politics. And they are accepting public comments on the merits of doing so.
To be clear, what we really need is to get all corporate money out of politics, to roll back Citizens United, end corporate personhood and institute public financing of elections. And we are working hard toward those long term goals.
But in the short term, given how corrupt the system is, disclosure of corporate political spending would be a meaningful, though small, step forward. And it's one we can achieve.
While the likes of the Wall Street Journal's Editorial Board are opposed to this idea, it's actually a commonsense idea that is not especially ideological.
In fact, nearly 60% of the S&P 100 companies already voluntarily disclose their political spending to investors. And of the remaining S&P 100 corporations, 50 had shareholder votes about political issues in 2011.1
Already one SEC Commissioner has come out in favor of the idea. We just need two more to agree.
Tell the SEC: Don't let corporations hide their political spending. Click the link below to submit a public comment:
http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=6883064&id=39232-2593817-AfTgY%3Dx&t=7
Matt Lockshin, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets
1. Committee on Disclosure of Corporate Political Spending's "Petition for Rulemaking" sent to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 08-03-11.

Facebook
Twitter

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.