How are we feeling about this latest court ruling?

[RMGOdirector]

RMGO has the only Colorado pro-gun PAC.

I would think most on this list would be happy to have a PAC like this involved in Colorado politics (you should, as we've played a role in electing all of the best pro-gun leaders in Colorado).

And, with an organization's PAC, it dramatically favors groups with large numbers (like gun owners).

The problem is that some "pro-gun" PACs give money to our enemies (NRA's PVF does it regularly).

Those gun owners who suggest broad limitations on campaign donations need to re-think their stance....

[sniper7]

Well all I can say is that is Stevens doesn't like it, I will more than likely be opposite of that view.
If people want to blow all their money supporting an issue or a candidate, they are going to do it. Soros has been mentions by others. they is no mistaking that he gives more than the legal limit is other ways.
I can see this issue as both helpful and hurtful, but I don't see that a limit need be placed.
Stevens said he doesn't want the integrity of elected institutions to be undermined but they already are, even with the limits that were set in place.

[mutt]

Those gun owners who suggest broad limitations on campaign donations need to re-think their stance....

Just because organizations and causes I support may benefit from this situation, it still doesn't make it right. Mixing vast sums of money and politics is just asking for eventual disaster. I understand the pro-gun lobby has no choice but to play this game since the anti-gun lobby will use the system to their advantage. But everyone involved should be asking if this game of legalized corruption should even be played at all? I realize I'm advocating some Utopian view of how a perfect system should work, but I will stand by the belief that this is simply wrong.

I think we can agree that most Americans citizens, real flesh and blood voters, were against the TARP and government bailout of the banking sector and Wall Street. Many people asked why our Government continued down this path when so many were vehemently opposed to it.

In 2008 alone the Finance industry spent $476 million dollars lobbying our government. Of that almost $58 million was in the form of direct contributions to Congress. While they slightly favor Republicans, they were more than happy to buy Democrats as well. They hedge their bets so to speak. The top contributors reads like a who's who of TARP recipients. Since 1990 the industry has pumped $2.3 billion dollars into the political system. Do you still wonder why Govt bailed them out against our wishes?

The sickening thing is the Finance industry is just one lobby amongst countless others.

I don't need to re-think my stance.

[esaabye]

Mutt, your points are well made and I understand where you are coming from.. I also do not like the special interests impact on policy.

So here is the problem, how can I trust congress to muzzle special interest groups in a fair and even method? To answer my own question, I can’t. I have no reason to believe that these representatives could or would enact a law that would prevent excessive influence while not infringing on my rights to lobby my representatives and to do so with any association I would like including Corporations or Non Profits.

I also do not see the constitutional basis for it and thus cannot support it. I would like to see us amend the constitution if we need to, but not pass laws that skirt it in the hope that the populist support will carry it thru.


I think that mutt and I must agree to disagree.