Unions Supporting Incumbents

[redcliffsw]

Look who's protecting incumbents

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Look-who-is-protecting-incumbents-94774964.html

[jerry wagner]

Title's misleading in that it implies only the Unions would be buying the election.... seems like the author advocates for the horrible decision that the Supreme Court just recently expressed that a corporation or union can spend unlimited funds in an election.  The author is specifically targeting unions in his article as if there should be outrage that they are spending their money to elect individuals that would best represent their interests... isn't that what the corporations would do?  So, what's the difference?

Also, the DISCLOSE act is not a horrible elimination of free speech, it is an attempt to remove some of the ridiculous sums of money that corporations could spend in an election and essentially buy the government that they desire.  Unions spend a significant amount during elections, but if you think about it they are spending the money of their members so it isn't excessive it relation to their membership.  Private citizens can choose to do so as well as does the Chamber of Commerce however to allow corporations who do not have true membership but rather shareholders, most of which are large institutions themselves does not value the speech of the individual, rather it is allowing them to potentially buy elections for the benefit of business only which would be disastrous to us all.