So I'm not alone?

Hi everybody, this is what's left of Wednesday, February 17, 2010.

If you were to ask my wife what I thought of this as it was being reported by the evening news, you would know that I pegged this one before the story even finished. It now appears that the majority of us feel that the US Supreme Court committed a huge gaff when they decided to allow corporations, labor unions, and other organizations to spend money directly from their general funds to influence political campaigns (see accompanying story at Yahoo).

In this regard there are lots of things that folks have strong opinions on but cannot prove: the existence of Area 51, who shot Kennedy, or whether astronauts landed on the moon. But one thing I think is for certain even though I have no concrete evidence; our elected officials are in bed with big business.

As elected officials, there are very specific rules regarding political activities. They are defined within the Hatch Act of 1939. Below are a few thing that are verboten under this act:

• Allow your official title to be used in connection with fund raising activities
• Solicit, accept, or receive political contributions from a subordinate employee
• Solicit, accept, or receive political contributions (except in limited circumstances involving certain Federal labor or employee organizations)
• Engage in political activity while using Government property, including computers, printers, copiers, fax machines, and telephones
  

But now the Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom decides that corporations (which possess many of the same attributes of individuals) can donate whatever they feel to a candidate who supports their particular agenda. Now I have to ask, where is the sense of adhesion to the law in that?

What are your thoughts?