Make IBM disclose political contributions.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Moxy Vote" <moxyvote@moxyvote.com>
Date: Jun 22, 2012 4:12 AM
Subject: Make IBM disclose political contributions.
To: <aquarianm@gmail.com>

This year, money will influence politics more than usual. View this email in a browser     Super PACs have raised $221 million to influence the 2012 election. So far. They can raise and spend unlimited funds. Think this could affect our republic? Corporations can now give like individuals; should they have this power?         Share on Facebook »            Tweet This » ENDS Sep 15 Tell IBM to disclose its political contributions Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission Corporations and unions can now spend as much money as they want to help political candidates win elections. In its landmark decision, the Supreme Court ruled that companies and unions enjoy the same freedom of speech the rest of us do. In this election year, they've raised $221 million so far. Public opinion Trevor Parker, former FEC chairman and adviser to John McCain, said the Court's inability to foresee the consequences of this decision "epitomizes the problem of having a court where no justice has ever run for any office, including dogcatcher." The public is largely against the Citizens United decision, and retired liberal Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens recently suggested that the court will revisit its ruling. Move to amend? The 2010 Citizens United ruling rubs some people the wrong way—so much so, in fact, that they want to amend the U.S. Constitution to make it clear that corporations are not people and money is not speech. Even the Supreme Court of Montana, a traditionally conservative Republican state, challenged the U.S. Supreme Court by upholding a law placing limits on corporate contributions. Most people expect the U.S. Supreme Court to exert its authority and slap down the Montana court, but still… Want to get involved? Sign the petition and support the campaign on the Move to Amend website. 109 shareholder resolutions this year Some shareholders want to limit their companies' involvement in politics. Nearly 1/3 of shareholder resolutions this year have sought more disclosure of corporate spending on political campaigns. We can't say it better than the Washington Post, so check this out: "One of the most polarizing fights over money in politics has been unfolding this spring at annual corporate meetings, where shareholders are mounting an intensifying effort to push companies to disclose the money they spend on lobbying and political campaigns." ...and they're getting more popular. Most shareholder proposals lose — that's just how it goes. And even if they win, they're non-binding. The readers of tea leaves, however, love to track these things and note that shareholders are increasingly supporting resolutions to disclose political contributions. On the blog of the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation, you can read how the tides of shareholder sentiment are shifting at 26 companies. The Center for Political Accountability has been pushing this issue at public companies for years, and it's not going away.     © Copyright 2012 Moxy Vote LLC 19 S. Darlington St. West Chester, PA 19382 You are receiving this email because you are a registered user with Moxy Vote. Please note that opting out of all updates will not affect emails pertaining to your account, password changes and updates about proxy ballots. In addition, you will still receive emails that are required to be sent pursuant to federal law or regulatory guidance. You may update your subscriptions or opt-out at our email preference page.         Take Action Shareholders Privacy Policy About Moxy Vote