A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Mazda
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Surprise: North Korea is part of the Kyoto Protocol!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 11th 10, 01:24 AM posted to alt.autos.toyota,rec.autos.driving,alt.autos.ford,rec.autos.makers.mazda.miata
Ala
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22
Default Surprise: North Korea is part of the Kyoto Protocol!


"JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> The other category would include places which don't even deserve to be
> called countries, like some in Africa. The country itself has no actual
> money. A foreign corporation wants to set up a mining operation, let's
> say. "Pollution & safety rules? We don't need no steenking rules!", and
> they pay some military strongman to agree completely. Pay the workers like
> slaves, if they pay them at all. Continue paying a succession of
> dictators. When it comes time to clean up the mess, who's supposed to pay
> for it? The country itself, whose bank accounts are probably dwarfed by
> the money held by the state of Rhode Island???
>


With the right payoffs, you don't even need to go to Africa to accomplish
this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...032403099.html
States try to adapt to Supreme Court's campaign finance ruling


By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 25, 2010

Many states are scrambling to react to the Supreme Court's landmark ruling
this year that loosened restrictions on corporate and union spending in
elections.

But rather than simply accepting the ruling, some states are looking for
ways to increase public oversight of political ads run by corporations -- or
are defying the high court altogether.

The machinations have become a little-noticed repercussion from the January
ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which found that
corporations and unions have a First Amendment right to use their general
treasuries and profits to spend freely on political ads for and against
specific candidates.

The case has drawn attention -- not to mention sharp criticism from
President Obama and other Democrats -- for its potential impact on federal
elections. But in addition to the federal law, two dozen states also had
statutes on their books limiting political spending by corporations. The
ruling set off a rush by state legislatures over the past two months to
adapt in time for this fall's elections.

Some of those states are simply working to remove language in their statutes
that might run afoul of the Supreme Court's decision. Nearly a dozen,
however, are also debating whether to require companies to disclose their
spending on political ads or, in some cases, to seek approval from corporate
boards or even shareholders.

The 5 to 4 ruling explicitly acknowledged that corporations could be
required to disclose their spending on political ads and to take
responsibility for approving them, much like politicians must do. (Companies
remain banned from contributing directly to candidates, though they can
provide such support through political action committees that raise money
independently.)

States considering new disclosure laws include Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut,
Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee and West
Virginia, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The
Iowa legislature has approved a bill requiring company directors to approve
of political spending.

"There are still people out there who think that corporate activity in
campaigns is a bad thing, and so there are a lot of efforts to push back on
the ruling," said Jennifer Bowser of the state legislatures group.

Colorado's Supreme Court ruled this week that several provisions of the
state's campaign finance law were unconstitutional under the Citizens United
decision. State officials are preparing legislation in response that would
impose disclosure requirements on companies or unions that fund political
ads.

"It's the one thing we can do to keep voters informed, if nothing else,"
said Jenny Flanagan, executive director of Common Cause of Colorado, which
supports campaign finance regulations. "What we're looking to see is more
than just who's doing it, but going after the shell corporations that
companies have set up in the past to hide their activities. We want to make
the disclosures meaningful."

One state has taken a more defiant approach. Montana Attorney General Steve
Bullock essentially dared opponents to sue the state, vowing to continue
enforcing restrictions on corporate political spending that date back to
scandals involving mining interests nearly a century ago. Testifying before
Congress in February, Bullock said the state's corporate spending limit "has
served us well and never been challenged."

A Denver-based conservative group took up Bullock's challenge this month.
The Western Tradition Partnership joined with a Montana paint company owner
in filing a lawsuit in state court challenging Montana's limits on corporate
expenditures as an unconstitutional ban on political speech.

Jeff Patch, a spokesman for the Center for Competitive Politics, which
supports the Citizens United ruling, said states need to be careful in
crafting new disclosure rules, arguing that some requirements could be
viewed by the courts as an attempt to quash free speech.

"Campaign finance laws should allow citizens to monitor their government,
not empower politicians and activists to become modern McCarthys," Patch
said. "Legislatures should consider the costs of allowing people to monitor
the political activity of their neighbors, colleagues and friends,
especially since the Supreme Court has recognized that independent political
speech -- as opposed to candidate contributions -- does not pose a risk of
corruption."

Ads
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Surprise: North Korea is part of the Kyoto Protocol!?????????????????????????? Ala Mazda 0 May 9th 10 03:44 PM
North Korea vs Australia - nuclear stress Klarynxx General 0 October 14th 06 01:03 PM
Welcome to North Korea Scott en Aztlán Driving 2 August 31st 05 03:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.