Personal tools
 
Views

Argument: Unlimited spending frees up advocacy groups in elections

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Cleta Mitchell. "Partner at Foley & Lardner who works in campaign finance law; filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of Citizens United, on behalf of two advocacy organizations opposing the ban on corporate expenditures: "The real victims of the corporate expenditure ban have been nonprofit advocacy organizations across the political spectrum. After the 2004 election, the Sierra Club paid a $28,000 fine to the Federal Election Commission for distributing pamphlets in Florida contrasting the environmental records of the two presidential and U.S. Senate candidates. Because the Sierra Club is a corporation, the FEC charged it with making an illegal corporate expenditure."[1]

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.