citizen's united has opened the flood gate in a way that is horrific. let's heavy that we can put --let's hope that we can put a dam-- >> what people don't appreciate, what citizen's united means, when members of the senate and house go to vote on an issue they're going to be thinking want to stand up to wall street or the coal companies or the oil companies. because when they go home on the weekend there could be a flood of 30-second tv ads without disclosure. it's a huge issue and it has to be dealt with. >> eliot: talk about reform efforts and one that passed and seems to be working, the vote that came in that says to citibank you're paying your ceo too much, something that dodd frank put in place. dodd frank seems to be working a little bit. >> in this instance it does. eliot, what this is about, everybody knows that the middle class is shrinking, property is increasing, and the people on top are doing phenomly well. and their effective tax rates have gone down which is one of the reasons why we have a deficit crisis . but what people are saying loo

>> there's no doubt that this -- the president has grave concerns about citizens united -- the citizensd the implications of it, and we see it in practice now, and those concerns extend beyond his own election, but what are the implications for the future? he is the president of the united states, and he is going to be out spent dramatically in this race, but what is going to happen in the future if you don't have an incumbent president, you don't have the ability to raise that money, and you are up against -- >> do you think he will lead a constitutional amendment? >> he has said jennifer and i am -- i know how determined he is, that he will pursue every avenue including a constitutional amendment if that's the best path to try to do something about this. this is not just a threat to a candidate or a party. this is a threat to a democracy. if he don't take this on, our country will be effected in a really profound and negative way. >> a threat to democracy. and now to my point as we just heard, republicans super pacs are going to be spending a billion dollars this election on top of wh

. >> citizens united. >> citizens united will only make it worse but it had already been bad, particularly to courts in a variety of states. the reality is, as much as i laud justice o'connor's efforts, she's had a conversion. she was part of the problem in republican party versus white, she has fond let'scy tsai the lord -- >> she's admitted that. >> she's found jesus and she's come back. there are ways to conduct elections that can deal with some of the problems you've talked about, nonpartisan elections, public funding in north carolina. there are ways to deal with it show that the process, the reform that the jacksonians wanted to happen was you wanted to have justices who had to present themselves to the people, who were not simply appointed by people from the wealthy classes. i can understand the impulse. the problem is we have allowed a free for all and now citizens united will ratchet it further up. the case out of west virginia that the supreme court said the judge had to recuse himself, his election had been supported by $3 million who had a case that appeared on the west virgini

. >> citizens united. >> it will only make it worse but it had already been bad before citizens united, particularly in elections of the highest courts in a variety of states. the reality is that as much as i laud justice o'connor's efforts, she has had a conversion -- she was actually part of the problem in a case called republican party of minnesota versus white. >> she admitted that she was. >> yes. she has found jesus and come back in. it is wonderful. >> jesus is an intimidating judge. >> indeed. it's not just the elections themselves. there are ways to conduct elections that can deal with some of the problems that you talk about. nonpartisan elections, public funding in north carolina for judicial elections. there are ways to deal with it so that the process, the reform that the jacksonians wanted to happen, you had to have judges present themselves to people, not just appointed from the wealthy classes. i can understand the impulse. the problem is that we've allowed a free for all in the election of judges. now citizens united will ratchet that up. the case in virginia, where th

i just think that by focusing on citizens united. you miss the real underlying tendencies of how money operates in politics. it tends to be much more subtle. it tends to happen much more often in congress than the presidential level. particularly in the house of representatives. >> let's hear from don, who's a democrat in detroit. good morning, don. >> i'm calling to protest washington journal having columnists to provide observation on a democratic party, when he's here to settle his partisan book. the way you are presenting it, this guy is to present the facts and nothing but the facts. that's what i wanted. >> what do you think about the democratic party? >> i'm a democrat. >> and how do you feel the party has evolved? it sounds like you take issue with what jay costa is saying, give us a counterpoint. your io

citizens united is a dagger poised at the heart of the american constitution. we must reverse it and we must use every tool at our disposal to make that happen. i encourage citizens, summon your full instincts about what we value in our democracy and make your voices heard. let's get this disclose act passed and let's go further to reverse. thank you very much, mr. president. and i yield the floor to my colleague. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont is recognized. mr. sanders: thank you, mr. president. i want to thank senator whitehouse and senator merkley and everybody else for the very hard work they've done on this monumentally important issue. it's hard for me to think of an issue that is more important. senator merkley a moment ago used the word "precensorship," which is an interesting concept and i want to give you an example of this. mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent to submit into the record an article that appeared in the "american banker" fairly recently. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sanders: and let me read you

>> it is all fall out from citizens united. but you've got groups such as cross roads gps and then american cross roads. now these are sister groups. they've said they're going to spend up to $300 million. it's got a lot of gop hea heavyweights behind it. you've got cross roads gps had actually raised more money. and that's the dark money, 501 c 4 social welfare nonprofit group. >> social welfare. >> exactly. that is their primary purpose. and then they will give you a lot of evidence as that is exactly what they're doing. and then you've got the super pack that has to disclose their donors. 501 (c-4 does do not have to diz close their donors. >> but you're not seeing that nearly as much as people had predicted. you -- >> that's interesting. one of the things i thought was interesting here is that when citizens united got -- the thing that we all seized particularly liberals and corporate spending. kp it was exxon mobile, for instance and we'll get to that in a second. one of the things we've seen is there hasn't been as much s

that was pretty citizens united yeah i know it was december two thousand to point to the two thousand turn and to point to citizens united to and say oh now all this is that i wasn't going to i was sentenced i'm sort of the entire thing i mean i think not only should be struck down but mccain feingold should be brought back which would have said to that corporate lobbyist you can spend two thousand dollars you can spend half a million. setting the setting the price at two thousand dollars so i'm doing a fine here it's a job yeah look it's a very unpopular case i think it's somewhat mischaracterized but in my view citizens united is about more speech is about more speech being out there i think that the idea that americans need to be somehow sheltered from critical thinking is wrong and i understand there's some things that i understand there can be abuses but there can always be abuses with speech and when you have that you need more speech not less what you're talking about is restricting speech i believe that it's it's a rightly decided case to mischaracterize when the press and dur

more spending by individuals, by rich people and citizens united actually did nothing to change that nd of spending. rich people were always allowed to spend before and after citizens you united. host: and the court is taking up the case on electronic surveillance. what's this about? guest: well, it's been almost -- almost -- about a decade since the bush administration started a warrantless wiretapping program in the wake of the september 11th attacks and that program allowed the monitoring of international calls which is to say one end of the call was outside of the united states and the other end was inside the u.s. and when it was revealed by "the new york times" in 2005, it caused a big controversy in 2008, congress legalized it. and after that, 2008 amendment, some human rights lawyers, some journalists said wait a second, this law, this secret program violates my fourth amendment rights and it allows the government to listen in on my phone calls. the supreme court is now finally 10 years out agreed to hear an aspect of the case but apparently narrow aspect which is simply wheth

but i really believe that this is a test case for citizens united. can money win over the people's choice? i mean, can money influence people to the point where a guy who is involved in a john doe investigation, a guy who has the worst job record in the country, a guy who has seen six of his associates be brought up on charges. he's got a legal defense fund. there are a lot of things swirling around this governor. if it were any governor, i mean just any governor, any state being involved in these circumstances, it would be politically an untenable situation to be in. but the fact is the money that is pouring into wisconsin is helping save this governor. he leads in the polls by five percentage points. i think it's going to be important for the democrats not to lose their faith and to do what they have to do, and just realize that sometimes when there is so much money floating around, anybody can buy a pole. the democrats are -- and the independents are going to have to belief that change is going to be good for them. look, i just think that this ele

women, the opening section of the 14th amendment that starts all persons born in the united states are citizens of the united states in the state in which they live, it said all persons not all white and black men. >> that are would have been the first time they were recognized as being citizens. >> the language. this issate 68. they were being held in a barbershop. the only men voted, you put your polls and your registration where the guys are that are in the barbershop. that is already shocking and she attempts to register the vote. in various places she tests. she does vote. >> then is put on trial for illegally voting because women were not eligible to vote and this is a court case. >> the vote doesn't count there. >> it's odd. it's complicated. the judge is afraid. he rules against her, but he refuses to fine her or put her in jail because he is not going to create what that will -- the point is that it was tested. there were women who said leave aside the negatives of the 15th amendment, the positive and the first section since all persons are entitled to equal protection of the laws. if

i think with this and combined with citizens united, we have a lot of annoying paperwork requirementsere's no campaign finance system in the united states at all anymore. we have gone back, essentially, of a system of unlimited, secret donations for any purpose. >> jeff toobin and i were talking about that earlier and he called it wild, wild west. and let me just bring in mike duffy for a moment, who covers politics, washington bureau chief for "time" magazine. do you agree that now this kind of is sort of anything can happen when it comes to campaign finance at this point? >> we've known for a long time that these are really hard cases to prosecute, but i think the edwards team had a special wild card, and that was john edwards. this is a man who before he was a vice presidential candidate or a presidential candidate or even a defendant, was one of the best courtroom readers north carolina had ever seen. he knew how to read a jury, he knew how to read a judge, he was really good at that. and his defense team had him as a consultant in his own case. and you could see, that's why they

has this been a citizen's united impact? >> it is. and we have seen this week most dramatically that this is a real to use the cliche double-edged sword for the campaigns. because on the one hand these are untold amounts of resources that can be thrown into the campaign. but the candidates don't get to control the message. so even as mitt romney keeps trying to talk about the economy which by the way is the issue that remains on the top of all the voters' concerns that day he was planning to talk about a big speech in florida and what did he talk about is an attack that never happened who was planned by people were not associated with his campaign. these outside sources are really sort of taking away from the candidates, the ability to control their own destiny in many ways. >> what's the difference though about the role of those outside forces in this campaign and what we saw say eight years ago when veterans for truth went after john kerry and independent of the bush campaign. >> people forget they did not actually spend a lot of mo

just disassembling the supreme court citizens united decision and saying no the corporations are not persons and no money is not speech it's property. the next comment of the night comes from daryl who post on the tom hartman facebook page had this question on the credibility of the media love the show i'm a daily listener question and being interviewed by reporters political figures make wellknown statements which are not true why doesn't anyone follow up with something like justify your statement with facts or just ask about opposing views why let him get away with these statements we all would like for them to explain their statements in detail never never does this happen if not challenge what they say remains factual errors the really simple answer i'm assuming that what you're talking about is not this show where i actually do challenge people but things like you know the sunday morning talk shows the network shows the evening news shows what you will see is first of all those shows if high profile politicians would not go on those shows those shows wouldn't exist because of bu

to a politician but the supreme court blew that up in two thousand and ten with theirs for the citizens united decision the only way to end of this insanity is to get the money is to get on board with the movement to get the money out of politics go to move to amend dot org that's it for the big picture tonight for more information on the stories we covered visit our website to tom parton dot com free speech tonight or. also check out our two youtube channels there are links of tom harpur dot com

>> i think the second question was if the citizens united case were overturned by some form of legislation how would that affect the lobbying. it wouldn't i don't think affect lobbying a great deal as we see it from some of those tech companies because a lot of their money is invested in direct lobbying and political donations, which strictly speaking i don't think were affected necessarily by the citizens united case, which dealt mostly in super pacs. i think we've seen a lot of that funding in the primary campaigns. we'll probably see a lot of that in the general election. and it's been, you know, largely electoral stuff. tech issues are not electoral yet. sopa, the online privacy bill we saw earlier this year, cyber security are crossing into that territory. but for the most part people don't know based on whether or not a lawmaker supports net neutrality or new cyber security regulations. perhaps they should. especially in places like silicon valley, where this is the local economy. but not yet. >> catfish kim tweets in, "i just dumped facebook for their founders outrageous display of

we have to overturn citizens united.ut what we can do tomorrow is legislation like the disclosure act. if i put an ad on television attacking my opponent i have got to be there on the scene saying i'm senator bernie sanders, i approve this ad. if banc of america, or the oil companies want to pay for candidates their ceo should be on there as well. and if you do that you will get a lot fewer adds than is currently the case. >> is there a desire on the part of the republicans to keep the status quo the way it is. >> think the republicans think citizens united is worker for them. on the other hand you have people like john mccain speaking out and saying citizens united in his view was a disastrous decision. can we get eight or nine republicans to speak up for american democracy? i don't know that we can, but i certainly would hope so. >> i have a different theory and that is we has shareholders getting our voices in that context, we own those corporations, i think shareholder activism we can get that stopped. and filibuster

governor romney may think that corporations are people for the purposes of the citizens united decision but they can't they have no shame like people they can't be shamed into doing the right thing corporations are quite monolithic if they want to hide behind what they're doing and not change one iota. so what do you think of the correct path is mean you know at the same time there's also a lot of pressure being put on the f.c.c. right now i think there's something more than two hundred sixty people actually had submitted comments to the s.e.c. demanding that they actually force corporations to at least be transparent about where it is that their money is going to and who exactly they're donating are regulators a better option or you know what comes next. you know this this is so tough i mean you know the the the longstanding internet scene relationships between washington and wall street and corporate america i mean this goes back centuries in this country some people would even say this is the bedrock principle upon which this nation was founded you know unfortunately you know i'm win

>> well, we have the power, because we are citizens of the united states of america and we have the powercause in montana we have initiative 166 and stand with montanians and we are saying that corporations are not people, and they are not allowed to bribe their way into the state capital or i guess even in washington, d.c. there is something really perverse about this. in 1977 congress said that the corrupt foreign practices act made it unlawful to bribe politicians in other countries, but now they are saying that a they can bride them in the united states, so we have a monopoly on bribery here in the country, and what is that saying to the rest of the world? corporations spend money in elections to get something. they get something which is lower taxes or less regulation and you can't describe it any other way. me as a shareholder, i don't dislike corporations, but if i were to ask the corporate ceo why we gave money in the last election, he would say to you, we have oget something, because for every $5 we spent, we get something back, and that is bribery. >> and i thought about this th

the the republicans have been so good to the iranians over the last thirty years so thanks to citizens united you have millionaires billionaires the robes the cokes the romney. anybody else who wants to kick in we know of foreign companies that have already you know jumped into our elections we saw this prayer played out in nebraska last night were tea party favorite deb fisher was you know every all the predictions were she's going to come in a distant third and then one guy joe ricketts comes in and dumps two hundred thousand bucks of it into a t.v. ad buy for and boom she pops out wins so should millionaires and billionaires be able to buy and own u.s. senators. i don't think that and i don't think that's what's going on here we've argued about this before i don't money's money but spending one and i understand what's made her a senate candidate well that's not what happened there a speech out there and people they bought into it for whatever reason you know money is money but spending money or not spending money that's expressive speech well in the in the emirates kluger got out or was ou

>> we have the power because we're citizens of the united states of america.we have initiative 166, stand with montanaens. we're simply saying corpses are not people. corpse corporations shouldn't be allowed to bribe their way into our state capital or washington, d.c. there's something perverse about this. in 17977, he said the corrupt foreign americans act -- we have a m a monopoly on bribery? corporations spend money in elections to get something. they get something which means lower taxes or less regulation. you can't describe it any other way. me as a shareholder, i don't dislike corporations but if i were to ask my corporate ceo why were we giving money in that last election? he'd have to say because we want to get something. >> by the way, i thought this through this afternoon with our producers. if this is really to make more money for people, in other words, get the right politicians in, you might as well get a tax deduction for it. if it's in your business interest to buy a politician, that's just the cost the doing business. perhaps that's carrying

towards political donations we'll talk about whether this strategy can actually work in countering citizens united and do you want to know just how much speculation is raising gas prices at the pump what if i told you it was as much as fourteen dollars out of every tank of gas and all of that and more if you tonight including those of happier but first take a look with the mainstream media decided to miss. oh all right so just like every other day in these tough economic times there were a lot of stories out there that the mainstream media was discussing when it came to the economy your money one scandal after another makes every taxpayer want to cringe beginning with wall street we are watching a major sell off right now bank of america saying that the first batch of homeowners will receive offer letters this week to cut the principal on their mortgages the economy center stage in the battle for the white house from the auto industry bailout to the unemployment rate across the country the fed saying that consumer borrowing surging more than ten percent in march that's the biggest monthly jump we'

citizen. in other words, you could come to the united states. but if you were chinese you could not be naturalized and become a citizen. but what did that mean about children of those people born here. and the courts ruled eventually the 14th amendment applies to them, also. >> and that is a really -- it seems to me, a really important decision that we should be teaching in our schools. it's in some ways the proud counterpart to the dred scott decision, because at the time that he was demanding recognition of his citizenship, there was not only an impossibility for his parents to become citizen, but there was so much anti-chinese sentiment in the united states. there is vicious anti-sentiment. which some members of the u.s. supreme court personally shared. but the issue or reining opinion that says that birthright citizenship is what it should do what it was meant to do, in the debates over the 14th amendment, there is a senator from -- there were several, but one i remember particularly from pennsylvania who says in congress, okay, in effect, ok

tavis: we agree that citizens united was a decision that opened up the floodgates. i think we concur on that point. in your book, we can all do better, you go a step further and you are honest about your assessment that the president squandered an opportunity to do something significant and reeled about campaign finance reform. it is not just -- significant and real about campaign finance reform. you are arguing that he could have done better. >> i argue that in president obama, i hope he will get reelected. i will support his reelection. the question i raised was when he came to office, he had so much good well. the country was with him, 70% approval rating. if he had moved for public financing of elections in his first two months in office, he could've gotten that. it did not happen, i am told, because it did not rank in the top five of issues important to people. of course, it did not. bieber in the middle of a recession. -- we were in the middle of a recession. they were interested in their jobs, their house, the basics. they did not think of this as one of the

they upheld a 1912 law out there in direct defiance of the supreme court citizens united decision.y bar corporate spending in elections. yesterday, the governor and his lieutenant governor through their support behind an initiative that would make it state policy to bar corporate money into politics. thank you for joining us. tell us how you as a governor and your republican lieutenant governor have the power to challenge this awful new supreme court ruling that has really dirtied up politics. >> we have power because we're we're citizens of the united states of america. we have stand with montanaians. politicians cannot bribe their way into the state capital or washington dc. there is something perverse about this. in 1977, congress said the corrupt foreign practices act made it against the law for bribe lg politicians in other countries. now they're saying they can bribe them in other states. there's a monopoly on bribes in this country? what's this say to the rest of the world. they spend money so they can get somebody. that means lower taxes and less regulation. i don't dislike

it's that sense of disconnect. >> when i hear citizens united, i think the coax brothers. i fink the power of a very small number of people i think this is what you are suggesting a small number of people -- >> that's part of the rulings that made the republican candidates stay in so long that they didn't do well, they didn't get any and they were gone. >> case in point, gingrich. sheldon adelson, who is the loss vegas casino magnate and a single issue patron, he is vehemently throw that netanyahu, for settlements, and high iran and he shoveled $10 million to keep new gingrich going during the first four or five months of this year. to me the moment it became apparent is the moment i stopped listening and i knew in for a long time and admired his creativity. she's a complete jerk when it comes to politics. when you have a single payer system. to the fire which we should do more of the lose credibility. >> i just want to weigh in and say that history professors across america new gingrich is no longer in the race and is no longer a symbol of our profession. [applause] can w

it's the citizens united ruling versus the will of the people. i'll break it down. us. >>> i asked is it fair to ask if mitt romney's experience as a vulture capitalist makes him fit. 82% said yes. 18% said no. >>> you won't believe the latest attack conservatives are launching on teachers in the state. into the big finish, i'm taking one of the biggest myths republicans are pushing when it comes to the economy. stay with us.udy glas s. you didn't have to come over! easy. hi. cascade kitchen counselor. look! over time, the other premium pac can leave cloudy, hard water deposits, but cascade complete pacs help leave glasses sparkling. cascade. love it or your money back. it's time to get going. to have the energy to keep up with your kids. to step up to a new challenge. it's time to start gellin' with dr. scholl's and feel the energy from your feet up. thanks to the energizing support and cushioning of dr. scholl's massaging gel insoles, your feet will feel so good you'll want to get up and go. >>> two weeks from tonight, only the third gubernatorial recall election