Excerpts - Which do you find more credible?

Re: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

[ ] Why Obama is wrong about the campaign finance ruling

"The history of campaign finance reform is the history of incumbent politicians seeking to muzzle speakers, any speakers, particularly those who might publicly criticize them and their legislation. It is a lot easier to legislate against unions, gun owners, “fat cat” bankers, health insurance companies and any other industry or “special interest” group when they can’t talk back."

-- Jan Witold Baran, author of the book “The Election Law Primer for Corporations,” filed a brief with the Supreme Court in support of Citizens United


[X] Reining in the high court

"Defenders of this vast expansion of corporate influence piously claim it's about free speech. But since when is a corporation, a creation of laws passed by governments, entitled to the same rights as an individual citizen? This ruling will give large business entities far more power than any individual, unless you happen to be Michael Bloomberg or Bill Gates.

"The only proper response to this distortion of our political system by ideologically driven justices is a popular revolt. It would be a revolt of a sort deeply rooted in the American political tradition. The most vibrant reform alliances in our history have involved coalitions between populists (who stand up for the interests and values of average citizens) and progressives (who fight against corruption in government and for institutional changes to improve the workings of our democracy). It's time for a new populist-progressive alliance.

"This court ruling should also challenge the fake populism on display of late, which disguises a defense of the interests of the powerful behind crowd-pleasing rhetoric against "Washington," "taxes," and, yes, "Obama."

-- E.J. Dionne is a Washington Post columnist.


[ ] Obama must compromise, Kennedy-style

"Finally, there would be tort reform. Standards of care, if followed, should protect providers from frivolous lawsuits. Malpractice suits and defensive medicine have a direct effect on health providers' operating costs, which has been estimated at $200 billion a year. Yet the 1,000-page reform proposals in the House and Senate are silent on the issue, as is the White House and the entire Democratic Party. This is not only a mistake of huge financial proportions, but also a strategic blunder. Aside from the savings tort reform could generate, it could also be among the missing links that bring Republican legislators on board.

"Unfortunately, Senator Edward Kennedy is not alive to help broker such a compromise. Given that and the result in Massachusetts, President Obama should honor Kennedy by doing what he would have done to realize his longtime dream of reforming health care."

-- Dr. Stuart H. Shapiro, president and CEO of the Pennsylvania Health Care Association.


[ ] Trickle Down Economics; The "Populist" Addiction -- David Brooks