We the Needham People said NO to 'Citizens United'!

Last night Town Meeting finally took the vote on the anti Citizens United resolution, Article 23. (read the Patch's write up here)

Presenters were well-prepared and compelling, and over the course of the 3 speakers, presented a solid and convincing narrative.

The first speaker from the floor, however, was in opposition, with a prepared text. The main arguments (in brief/my words, obviously):

1. Don't take away corporations' right to speak because YOU can be a corporation too (If Sierra Club and Churches can't speak for us, who will?) and 
2. "Beware of unintended consequences of passing this--McCain Feingold was supposed to fix things and look what happened," and 
3. "We don't even know what we're voting for/we don't have the text of the amendment" and 
4. Voting on this will open the floodgates to further frivolous votes on national issues which have no place in town meeting 

Another opponent also had prepared remarks and covered much the same.

Bob Smart and Karen Price made the presentation for the petitioners; Jerry Wasserman presented the case from the Board of Selectman, which had voted to support. Among other great input from the floor, TMM Lois Sockol gave a fantastic, passionate speech in support; I would love to get video of that!

State Rep. Denise Garlick made a statement declaring that this discussion was instructive to her and her vote on s772 (the state bill to overturn citizens united).

During pro speakers, many people around me, at least, were nodding in agreement and whispering in disagreement during the opposition.

The question was called, ending debate, and we voted with a strong majority on a voice vote. Some are saying 2/3; I thought 60/40. The moderator called it and Town Meeting, breaking decorum, burst into a spontaneous round of applause!

It was extremely satisfying to do something that feels so important and central to our democratic principles. Thank you to every person who supported this truly grassroots effort!!

There is more work to do, of course. Ours is but one voice in a growing chorus, and it is but one avenue for seeking the change we want. Other efforts need organizing and support--for instance, a ballot measure for November's election, where voters can weigh in on the issue. Signatures need to be collected, more conversations with neighbors and friends need to be had. 

So don't delete those "Citizens United" files in your head! This is a long fight, and we must work over the long haul!!

Needham takes on 'Citizens United': TONIGHT

UPDATE: Vote postponed til Monday--see WethePeopleNeedham.wordpress.com for uptodate info.
__
I'm sick of the highest bidder controlling our political process. 'Citizens United' is the 2010 Supreme Court decision that said we can't control corporate spending on elections (as we had done w/ McCain-Feingold), paving the way for the Age of SuperPACs, with their unregulated, massive "dark money" flooding the airwaves and muddling the issues. (I have collections of resources on money in politics, here and here)

If money is speech, then I don't have free speech, at least not as much as Coca-Cola or Exxon.

Citizens United and Super Duper PACs

I have a thread on Money in Politics generally (Money, Influence, Corporations, Corruption, Lobbying), but there is a growing awareness (GOOD!) about the Citizens United decision, so I'm making a category/thread just for it--and abolishing it. education and information is/will be important in building grassroots support critical to actually getting a constitutional amendment. So let's get up to speed and start spreading the word! :)

Must See Infographic: : Who Controls the Political Process | The Big Picture (3/2012):

Ask Bill: How can ordinary people help to overturn or nullify the Citizen United Decision? from BillMoyers.com 

WebSites Dedicated to Reversing Citizens United

• We the People, Not We the Corporations | Move to Amend 
• Reclaim Democracy for the People! | freespeechforpeople.org 
• Amend 2012 - Because only People are People | Amend2012.org

Regulating Money in Political Campaigns: Where are the MA leaders?

From the Washington Independent:

Sen. Al Franken and 16 other senators are proposing a constitutional amendment that would return the authority to regulate money in political campaigns to state and federal governments, an ability that was partly undermined by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizen United decision. The Senate amendment, which has a recent House counterpart, would give Congress and states the authority to regulate money spent in federal and state political campaigns.

Only one of our MA congressmen--Jim McGovern-- has signed onto this.  Where's Stephen Lynch?

Rep. Lynch's Needham Town Hall: The Surprising and the Not

[see UPDATES at end of post for REDISTRICTING and BARNEY FRANK]
Recently, Congressman Stephen Lynch came to Needham as part of a series of "town hall"-style fora around the 9th District.

This Needham Patch article offers a good write-up of the scene and the topics covered.  I just want to point out here the surprising and not surprising elements of what I heard on that day.

First, Mr. Lynch deserves kudos for being much improved from his spring town halls, which felt much more uni-directional than being an open exchange of ideas. In spring, attendees submitted questions on index cards, which were sorted thru by a moderator, and then the Congressman answered. The opportunity for follow up and questions was not there, or did not happen for whatever reasons.  For dog's sake, someone said, "Keep government out of my Medicare" and Mr. Lynch replied, "I totally agree with you sir" without any opportunity for pushback!!