I defend the right of SEIU, as well as GE, to develop and write postion papers all day long on ideas and problems that interest them.
I reject outright, the idea that any entity spend money to promote those ideas. If they are good enough, then those ideas will gain traction with the people and free speech wins. If they aren't good enough, then those ideas will fall away, and free speed wins.
How can anyone argue that spending money improves discourse? The only thing that money does is to artifically influence behavior. The more money, the more behavior is influenced. The folks with the most money have the loudest voices and the ability to overwhelm and "shout down" those they disagree with. If 1000 people believe that TARP is fundamentally wrong and spend one dollar to send a letter to congress, and one company thinks TARP is the cat's meow and spends $10,000 to hire a single lobbiest, how is that free speech?
This is the core concept of freedom of speech. I've looked again and no where does it say that anyone has the right to be able to "shout down" others.
I remember the disappoint of all here when TARP passed, contrary to the will of the people. Why did it pass? Because of the confusion of "corporate free speech" folks have here.
----------