A Real Leader

UPDATE:  Congressman Castle gives a statement on the proposed bill. Details are still being drafted so it is unavailable a this point.
Van Hollen and Castle Announce Bipartisan Agreement in Response to Citizens United   Washington, D.C. – Today Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Congressman Mike Castle (R-DE) announced that they have reached a bipartisan agreement on a legislative response to the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United v. FEC, which they plan on introducing shortly.  Below is their joint statement:   “The Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United v. FEC overturned two decades of precedents that prohibited corporate and union expenditures in political campaigns.  This decision enables larger financial interests to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens, allows foreign corporations to spend money through their domestic subsidiaries, and permits major recipients of taxpayer dollars to funnel these funds into political activities.   “The bipartisan legislative response to this ruling will promote openness in government and compel disclosure of the money that is being used to finance elections.  We believe the American people have the right to know who is spending money to influence our democracy.  Furthermore, it will close loopholes to prevent foreign influence, as well as keep major beneficiaries of taxpayer money from financing political campaigns.    “The Court’s ruling in this case demonstrates a blatant disregard for its own precedents and ignores the clear intent of Congress to reduce the influence of powerful special interests.  We have an obligation to provide transparency and integrity in our political process, and we urge our colleagues to join us in supporting this important legislation.”    
It is no doubt that Congressman Castle is a real leader in Congress.  No Child Left Behind, Campaign Finance Reform, Bailouts, the Patriot Act, the “Assault” Weapon ban, and so called embryonic stem cell research.  Now he is the first Republican to sign on to undermining the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling which removed speech restrictions on pure political speech even if it comes from corporations or labor unions.  Leading us seems to come natural to the Congressman.  The problem is that he seems to be leading us away from the founding principles.  I will keep an open mind on this one until I have more of the facts.  I have a request out to see the statement put out Monday which is not on any of his websites or emails.  When I get it, I will bring it to you. You will have to judge for yourself.

18 thoughts on “A Real Leader”

  1. Please stick to the thread or be deleted. I am weary of that issue. It is a none issue and I tired of it before it started. You can debate each other and I will join in when I see fit. Frank and I have given what 4 threads to discuss that issue. This is about freedom of speech and someone’s attempt to curb it. I think that deserves discussion.

  2. Another stupid move by Castle. Do you really want Christine to win the Primary????

  3. You’re against this?

    And they asserted their bill, which has yet to be introduced “will promote openness in government and compel disclosure of the money that is being used to finance elections. We believe the American people have the right to know who is spending money to influence our democracy.

    I’d expect opposition to something like that from Nancy Cook, not you. 😉

    The Supreme Court’s overruling more-or-less allowed for the campaign ad financing to once again run amok, something that many got sick of many years ago for various reasons and various motivations. Why is it when we went behind the 8-ball we suddenly forgot about that?

  4. The Patriot Act, really? You accuse Castle of not voting with the GOP, he votes with the GOP on the Patriot Act, and you blame him for it. 3 GOP “no” votes on the Patriot Act, David. Same can be said for NCLB. 189 GOP “yes” votes, 34 GOP “no” votes. Again, Castle voted with the GOP.

    Meanwhile it’s April 20th, and still no Christine O’Donnell campaign finance report on the FEC website. What’s the excuse du jour?

  5. I am opposed to it. If the message is true then you have the right to say it. Read the Supreme Court ruling on anonymous flyers from the 80’s.

    I am not concerned with requiring that a corporation or union disclose that they paid for an ad. I do have a problem with demanding the picture of a CEO in the ad. Why? Do people recognize CEO’s outside of a half dozen? It is an act of intimidation. It is an attempt to tamp down controversial speech. We are not talking about campaign contributions. Why shouldn’t a group of farmers be able to get together and mail people sympathetic to them such as suppliers and relatives, and clients to tell them that so and so has policies which help or hurt farmers? Should we require the ad be taken up with pictures? If a corporation is targeted should it be able to explain its side?

    I think a compromise could be reached which leans toward disclosure, but the logic of disclosure was that it helped us to know who was donating to campaigns because it tamped down secrecy which could lead to quid pro quo favortism. If you know who did what, a person will abstain if it is too close for comfort. You avoid special favors and if you don’t then you can remedy that the next election.

  6. This means Castle is more afraid of Coons than he is afraid of Christine.

    As for David’s defense of the corporate takeover of elections all I can say is that he is true to his version of serfdom…I mean patriotism.

  7. Some people have a problem with voting not voting with the GOP. I have a problem with voting against the constitution. I don’t really care if Republicans or Democrats do it. I oppose federalization of education. I oppose a government so powerful that it can go into your library records, phone records and infiltrate your church without a warrant. I oppose banning guns. I oppose taking tax money for unneccessary experimentation on human beings. Other people disagree. Like the Congressman, they are good people.

    My standard is a lot closer to the Constitution. I give the Congressman a pass on the bailouts because we were on the verge of a complete economic meltdown. People forget how bad it really was because we acted to avoid the problem then just like Y2K people assume there really was not one (we spent nearly a trillion dollars fixing the problems so no wonder there was no Y2K crisis). I also hated the bait and switch. We were sold one program and two weeks later Paulson changed the strategy. It was an outrage and not what the Congress was led to believe. The other issues are his alone. He bragged about helping to craft these pieces of legislation. If you like them, vote for him. If you don’t, what should I tell you?

    I am not being too harshly critical. I am just saying that I have a concern because of his track record. I don’t like some aspects to the summary of the bill, but I am willing to await the full statement before I make a decision on it. I just get a bad feeling when you can count the number of Republicans signed on to something with one hand and in this case one finger.

  8. I don’t know about Christine’s FEC report. I am waiting for all of the major candidates to do a post comparing them. She was traveling today so I could not get a statement from the campaign on anything. I will ask Stephen tomorrow if it is not on the site. The deadline was April 15 and it should be up by now on the FEC site if it was filed then. It is too late for me to do anything but email tonight.

    I am not feeling the love Alice.:) I am not a spokesperson for any campaign. Your question is legitimate. It seems a pattern to have late reports. We will see if that is true in this case. If I were you, I would not be too worried about the result of the report. Maybe next quarter.

  9. Beth Miller from the News Journal reported on all of the Republican Congressional Candidates on Sunday.

  10. After fighting hard on the side of cancer in the health care debates, David now feels the need to support multinational corporations.

    A true patriot, he is always siding with the underdog.

  11. Voting with or against the GOP doesn’t make you right..or wrong. There are times when the Democrats get it right and in my opinion the Patriot Act is one of those times. It invades privacy and strips Americans of basic natural rights. You can spin it however you want but as Ben Franklin said, “Anyone who is willing to give up liberty for a little safety deserves neither.” We may ask the government to defend us and to ensure the security of our nation but that does not translate to trampling on the rights of Americans.

    There are times when the GOP gets it right, like on healthcare. The federal government does not have the power to control the nations healthcare system. They are not Constitutionally allowed to do it. Do I think the system is fine the way it is? Of course not but there are other ways to fix the system besides an out of control and near tyrannical take over of a private industry by the federal government. Allow the states to regulate it, institute tort reform, allow “open borders” for insurance companies and work with private companies to ensure that medical records are safely digitized and that medical forms are more standard and less uniform. Be a guide, not a dictator. On this the GOP is right.

    There are times when neither side appears to get it. Cap and Trade is an example of this. Skyrocketing energy prices are NEVER a good thing and this very thing has been known to CAUSE recessions and perhaps lead to depressions. This is not something you EVER do on purpose, even when the economy is stable. Why in God’s name would we want to do it when our economy is on the brink? They say it’s because of Global Warming. If the planet were in so much peril and it was so obvious and the consensus was so broad, why is it that America would be the only one doing this? Why would scientist after scientist be coming out of the woodwork to proclaim that their data is flawed, made up or incomplete? Also, if we would make such a difference, why is it that the impact is suggested to barely make a dent in the current “damage” to the planet? Suggestions are that even if the U.S. completely stopped using fossil fuels and we returned to the stone age, our output would actually be picked up and surpasseed by developing nations within 5 years. Both Republicans and Democrats supported this measure and on this both are wrong.

    Pay attention to the polls, I know the politicians say the opposite but that is because they are power drunk. The people will tell you…the people stand with the founders.

  12. Amen it is not about R’s and D’s but right and wrong. Does this hurt the rights of Americans, the future of Americans, abandon the constitution? If the answer is yes to any of them, we need to say no.

    I would differ with you on a couple of things. Democrats supported the Patriot Act, too. The intial panic of 9/11 was understandable, but when it came to extending it , they put up a fuss then voted for it en masse every time it comes up. Republicans opposed Cap and tax with 8 exceptions out of over 200 in Congress. No Senate Republican signed on.

  13. This is simply a stratigic move by Castle to ensure that he carries New Castle County. What’s important to him is his election to the Senate- nothing else matters.

    He already has his money- he wouldn’t want anyone else to get theirs, especially from an evil corporation. Never mind the fact that most large companies are incorporated in Delaware.

  14. I’m not saying Democrats (or Republicans) can’t be blamed for any of this simultaneously. I’m saying that you hear “Conservatives” like Sean Hannity advocating for why the Patriot Act is a good thing. I disagree with him and conservatives like him that the Patriot Act is either good or Constitutional. It’s one thing to suspend habeas corpus during an insurrection (a la Abraham Lincoln) or even to detain enemy combatants for an extended period during a time of war but it is quite another to wire tap potentially innocent citizens and to invade their rights and privacy. I have not heard many Democrats out there touting the benefits of the Patriot Act.

    Republicans in both the House and Senate repeatedly argue that the Climate Change Hoax is a real event and by extension they further the argument that Cap and Trade is necessary. 8 Republicans (one being Castle by the way) felt so strongly about this issue that they agreed increase energy costs for the citizens of their states by $3,000 or more per person annually. For some families this can be as much as $20,000 annually. Kudos to the Senate Republicans for having the guts to oppose it but then again, until Scott Brown they could oppose it until they were blue in the face and it would have made no difference because they were unable to stop it. Let’s see if they still unite in opposing it.

Comments are closed.