« | »

Hearings On “Un-American” CFR Ruling

From The Hill:

Schumer calls for hearings on ‘un-American’ court decision

By Tony Romm and Michael O’Brien – 01/21/10

The Supreme Court’s ruling Thursday striking down limits on corporate and union spending in elections is "un-American," Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday.

Schumer, a top Senate Democrat who formerly ran their campaign committee, said he would hold hearings on the decision in the coming weeks.

"I think it’s an un-American decision," Schumer said at a press conference Thursday. "I think when the American people understand what this radical decision has meant they will be even more furious and concerned about special interest influence in politics than they are today."

Democrats have responded quickly to rebuke the court’s 5-4 ruling in the Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission case, handed down Wednesday. The decision essentially kills a sizable portion of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, better known as the McCain-Feingold Act for its high-profile sponsors.

The law, until this ruling, had subject corporations to special spending limits and disclosure rules that did not apply to individuals.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), the sponsor of that 2002 law, has called for new legislation to address the court’s ruling. Schumer said Thursday he’d hold hearings as chairman of the Senate Rules Committee.

"As chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, which is the committee with jurisdiction over these issues, I’m announcing that we will hold hearings on the impact of this decision within the next of couple of weeks," Schumer said.

At least one Republican — Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell — praised that ruling on Wednesday. He described the court’s decision as guarantee of "free speech" to businesses groups that were previously deprived of it.

But a handful of Democrats have since charged otherwise. Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said earlier Wednesday that new corporate spending abilities would only ensure "citizens voices are drowned out."

Schumer echoed those criticisms in his press conference Wednesday morning, describing the ruling as a grave mistake.

"We will regret the day this decision has been issued," Schumer said.

Meanwhile, once upon a time Mr. Schumer was singing a very different tune.

From the the April 2005 Fox News archives:

Transcript: Sens. Cornyn, Schumer Talk Judiciary

Monday, April 11, 2005

WALLACE: Senator Schumer, do you think, when Senator Cornyn made his remarks, when House Majority Leader DeLay attacked federal judges for their decision not to hear the Terri Schiavo case — and let’s a look at what DeLay had to say: "The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior" — what do you think that Senator Cornyn and Majority Leader DeLay are up to here?

SCHUMER: And look, I accept that Senator Cornyn wants to clarify his remarks, but you have to put this in a larger context. There’s a whole drumbeat on the hard right to tell judges they shouldn’t be independent, to say to judges: We are going to go after you one way or another if you exercise your independence.

You know, Chris, we’re a nation of checks and balances. The Founding Fathers gave federal judges a lifetime appointment for the very reason that they should be independent, that they should be independent of sort of being pressured politically to do something.

That’s the warp and woof in our country, and yet we have people on the hard right — this statement isn’t alone. Senator DeLay’s isn’t alone. There was a big conference right now led by those who want to use the nuclear option.

And one of the people there, a guy named Vieira, a conservative lawyer, said, Justice Kennedy should be impeached. And Joseph Stalin had a slogan, it worked well for him, whenever he ran into difficulty: No man, no problem.

I mean, this is getting out of hand. It’s an idea that judges should not be independent, that, you know — let me say something, Chris. The Republican Party won the last election, but it wasn’t a landslide. It was 51 percent of the vote for the president, 51.5, small majorities in the House and the Senate, and yet they think there ought to be — or at least the hard right, not every Republican — there ought to be one-party rule, that they ought to get their way on judges, every judge ought to be approved, that if they don’t get their way,…

WALLACE: All right.

SCHUMER: … there ought to be a nuclear option.

WALLACE: I get it.


SCHUMER: Checks and balances…

But that was then.

And this is now.

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, January 21st, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

12 Responses to “Hearings On “Un-American” CFR Ruling”

  1. U NO HOO says:

    Chum Schucker: Running Scared

  2. proreason says:

    What a cluster.

    Schumer is the lowest of the low. I would rather listen to the Moron for hours than chuckie for a minute.

  3. nascarnation says:

    Schumer is the most snivveling weasel on the planet.
    He literally makes my blood pressure go up.

  4. Enthalpy says:

    Schumer is paid for and doesn’t give a damn about democracy.

  5. White_Polluter says:

    I can’t believe it took 8 years for portions of that crappy constitution-shredding abortion of a law known as McCain-Feingold to have portions struck down. It’s a sad commentary on the judiciary when it takes more than 12 seconds to determine that limiting political speech is unconstitutional. How long will it take to determine that Obama can’t nationalize auto companies?

    This just in: Chuck Schumer said that the Supreme Court obviously feels the Congress has been moving too slowly on health care reform, so they voted against McCain-Feingold.

  6. tranquil.night says:

    This poses an interesting situation going forward for Snowe, McCain, even maybe Brown. Nobody seems to think that this can lead anywhere, so the hearing is just gonna be a dog and pony show for slamming Conservative SCOTUS. So there’s a choice: do the ‘mavericks’ continue to bad-mouth corporate America, or do they finally wake up to see there is no populist rage against big business?

    Speaking of ‘maverick’ moderates, I know Roger Ailes is a savvy businessman in media, but I’m convinced FoxNews is hellbent on denying Conservatives control of the GoP.

    “Brown Says His Model for Governing Is McCain” at foxnation, yet nowhere in the story does Brown say such a thing. Same narrative coming from Hotair even. I don’t know if that’s how he answered a loaded question or something, but to me he’s very clear that his “model for governance” is not beholden to any archetype but non-biased common sense and adherence to truth.

    The titular deception is only a few levels below an ‘unexpected’ AP jobs report, and it’s something I haven’t liked for a while about the ‘fair and balanced’ network. It’s making me nervous that the moderates and these political worms like McCain (no offense but we can’t trust you man) are coming out and trying to hijack our energy and our movements again. We the people set the tone and the premise now, not old Washington elites; so ditch the tricks. for the love of God.

    • proreason says:

      Good thinking tn. I hadn’t noticed that Brown had said no such thing.

      It’s is somewhat similar to my contention that Bill O’Reilly is actually the little boy king’s best friend, even though he is obviously regularly critical. The problem with Bill is that he acts like everything is normal…just the latest variation of the eternal ying and yang of politics. So we shouldn’t really be worried. Everythings will sort itself out when wiser heads, like O’Reilly, pull the little boy king back to the center.

      Hannity gets it right. Obama IS Bill Ayers. He IS reverend Wright.

    • jobeth says:

      “It’s making me nervous that the moderates and these political worms like McCain (no offense but we can’t trust you man) are coming out and trying to hijack our energy and our movements again”

      Time to give them all a ticket home. November we should bring in a whole new group who have yet to be tainted by the old crew in DC

      If they won’t term limit themselves…we should do it for them. And we need to only vote in those who ‘get it’. As you said, “We the people set the tone and premise now” Out with the old and entrenched and in with fresh faces with the people and constitution as their primary concern.

      Pro….I too have just about had it with Bill. I mutter at the screen every time I watch ‘The Factor’. My husband asked me why I watch him if he irritates me so much. I couldn’t think of an answer. Why DO I watch such a pompous, rude, interrupting, narcissistic wind bag? No excuse…maybe I am a masochist deep down.

    • tranquil.night says:

      Jo, Malkin has a must-read on the status of the McCain machine currently: http://michellemalkin.com/2010/01/22/conservatives-beware-of-mccain-regression-syndrome/

      He uses (possibly naive) Scott Brown for a “take under mah wing” photo-op, enlists him for phone messages for his campaign, puts Sarah Palin in the unfortunate position of having to support his re-election bid because he exposed her, all the while his camp is pouring millions of beltway money to get the ‘maverick’ brand in over the grass roots candidates.

      McCain Runs Ad Slamming Conservative Opponent (who hasn’t entered race): http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/01/mccain_runs_ad.php

    • jobeth says:


      Thanks for that Malkin link…GREAT read.

      Here’s hoping this isn’t Sarah’s first compromising of her principles.

      I get it that she ‘owes’ McCain the respect to not bad mouth him for her treatment during the campaign, but she needs to also understand that the people like her and support her for standing up to the Republican machine and sticking with true constitutional princples.

      You can’t do that and support machine party members just because you ‘owe’ them.

      She needs to stick to acting ONLY on her principles and to not back ‘machine’ candidates just to pay back a ‘debt’. I can see her sliding down the proverbial slippery slope here that so many other new and/or junior candidates have slid down.

      This is a perfect example as to why we NEED term limits. Much harder to press junior politicians if you don’t have an entrenched lock on them.

  7. MinnesotaRush says:

    “I think it’s an un-American decision,” Schumer said”

    Well .. if Chuckie thinks it’s un-American, it’s gotta be one of the best things to come down the pike for us in a long time, Chuckie.

    Matter of fact, Chuckie, I’d bet that a lot of us average American citizens will throw a whole bunch of you above average thiefs out of our House and out of our Congress in the upcoming elections.

    Get ready, Chuckie. Can you say jail and assett forfeiture/siezure?

  8. NoNeoCommies says:

    Q: How can you stop Shmuck Shumer cold when he is at a dead run?
    A: Put a podium and microphone up in front of cameras.

    I can only assume Chuck the Shmuck is only still in office because his constituency wants to piss off the rest of America by forcing him on us.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »