Updated: December 10, 2012 6:15AM
Council resolution on super PAC money very meaningful
This is in response to Jeff Ward’s column Oct. 29, ”No point in council taking issue with this.”
Ward opposes the Elgin City Council passing a resolution. His argument was: “With everything they have to consider in these trying economic times, the last thing our already overworked city councils should be rendering is meaningless resolutions.” Meaningless? I disagree!
The Citizens United Supreme Court decision to which is referring allows unlimited amounts of dollars to be donated to super PACs by the super rich, corporations and unions. They choose the candidate while the ordinary citizen is left out of the nomination process. Super PACs have shown their overwhelming power by buying influence through purchasing dishonest television ads that get candidates elected. The council passing a resolution against this negative ruling would show they stand with their fellow citizens of Elgin sharing their concerns that our democracy is being aggressively destroyed.
We heard from the citizens of Elgin when we collected signatures to get an advisory question on the ballot. It didn’t matter what political stripe they were; overwhelmingly, people were disgusted that the special-interest groups (some of them are secret) were contributing to the $6 billion that was projected to be spent on the presidential and congressional elections. The people know these special-interest groups expect favors for their donations. Those favors do not help those who have lost their jobs, homes and health care.
No one wants this issue moldering on some shelf! Passing a resolution would be a grass-roots effort at its best. It may not be able to change anything immediately; but with the Elgin City Council passing a resolution along with other cities, they could help push Illinois legislators to pass legislation calling for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would overturn Citizens United. That would be most meaningful!
Many councils, counties and states back money-limit bid
I beg to differ with Jeff Ward’s column in the Oct. 29 Courier-News, “No point in council taking issue with this.”
Ward opposes the Elgin City Council’s request from citizens for help in passing a resolution that would “limit the use of corporate, special interest and private money in any political activity, including influencing the election of any candidate for public office.”
In Illinois, the Chicago City Council and Galesburg City Council supported their citizens’ request by passing their resolutions. By state — California, Hawaii, New Mexico, Vermont, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maryland, Connecticut and Massachusetts have all passed their resolutions. Colorado and Montana are due to pass theirs shortly. There are plenty of citizens in many states, counties and city councils who are supporting a constitutional amendment to overturn what was a disastrous decision by our Supreme Court in 2010 when it reinterpreted the Constitution and then declared that corporations are people and with personhood — and they are now able to give unlimited, big-secret money to candidates and political parties for the sole purpose of influencing elections.
Just how does Ward think good candidates who support the middle-class values will be able to afford to run for office when there is all this money from the opposition “trying him in the Court of TV”? As we have witnessed from the Nov. 6 election, nearly $6 billion was spent to influence the election for presidential and congressional races — to fund negative TV ads.
Just imagine what good all that money could do for helping people or even paying down the debt instead of all this negativity aimed at buying our elections.