Brazil's top court bans corporate political financing

[GennGreymane]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/d13f4...ical-financing

RIO DE JANEIRO (AP) — Brazil's Supreme Court on Thursday banned corporate contributions to political campaigns and parties, a hot issue as investigators in the nation's biggest corruption scandal say such financing was used by businesses to win lucrative contracts with state-run oil company Petrobras.

The court ruled 8-3 to block such campaign financing — which in the most recent presidential elections represented well over 90 percent of the funding for leading candidates and eventual presidents.

Brazil's bar association brought the case to the top court, which first took it up in 2013 but saw a conservative justice block a final vote until now.

"The influence of economic power culminates by turning the electoral process into a political game of marked cards, an odious pantomime that turns the voter into a puppet, crumbling in one blow citizenship and democracy," said Justice Rosa Weber in voting to strike down the financing.

Despite the ruling long called for by transparency watchdog groups, the top court's action may not be the final say on the matter. Brazil's Congress last week passed a new campaign financing measure that would allow corporations to make donations, albeit in smaller amounts.

The 1995 law the court struck down Thursday night allowed corporations to donate 2 percent of their gross revenue from the year prior to any particular election cycle. The new measure passed by Congress limits corporations to making a total of just over $5 million in contributions.

President Dilma Rousseff is expected to veto the new measure. If her veto is overridden, the top court would have to again take up the issue, which analysts say it would likely to in an urgent manner, given Thursday's ruling.

Petrobras is engulfed in a huge kickback scheme in which prosecutors allege at least $2 billion in bribes were paid out over about a decade by big construction and engineering firms, which were in turn given vastly inflated contracts with the energy company.

Prosecutors and former Petrobras executives who admit to have taken bribes and have turned state's witnesses say that part of the money made its way to the campaign coffers of political parties via what were then legal contributions.

In recent election cycles, construction and engineering firms have routinely been among the biggest campaign donors to politicians and parties across the political spectrum. Such money has tended to track the Brazilian government's huge investments in infrastructure in the past decade as it has hosted the world's two biggest sporting events and announced aggressive efforts to improve ports, roads, airports and railways, among other projects.

An Associated Press analysis ahead of last year's World Cup found that campaign contributions by Brazil's No. 2 construction company, Andrade Gutierrez, increased 500-fold from one election cycle to the next, after it was known which cities would host soccer matches and thus see billions spent on new or refurbished stadiums and other works.

Andrade Gutierrez at the time said its contributions were legal — which they were. But polls have consistently said in recent years that over three-fourths of Brazilians believed such contributions stoked widespread corruption.

The three justices who voted to maintain corporate financing said they found nothing in the constitution to prohibit it.

"My understanding is that (corporate financing) isn't contrary to the constitution . as long as they're made under an effective mechanism of control that prevents the abuse of economic power," Justice Celso de Mello said in voting to keep the contributions.

[Grummgug]

Campaign Finance Reform is a joke. Its impossible. If the US ever passed such a thing, it would OBVIOUSLY mean that the US media would have MUCH more influence on the elections than ever.

The idea is to ban political ads or political campaign contributions to candidates. But it does not really regulate the mainstream media. So you have conservative activists like the Koch brothers who donate millions to candidates and causes. You stop them from doing it. Ok. So then they just BUY media outlets. They BUY CBS, NBC, ABC, or maybe Paramount Pictures. Then they start producing television shows and movies with their point of view. They get broadcast around the election.

Currently, people in favor of CFR aren't concerned with TV shows and movies making political statements around elections because Hollywood slants overwhelmingly liberal, and the people who want CFR are liberal. So they turn a total blind eye to it. But if CFR ever becomes reality, people like the Koch brothers will be FORCED to start buying media assets to make their political statements. And I'm sure the people in favor of CFR will suddenly notice that tv shows and movies DO in fact make political statements and can be viewed as advertising for an election.

Its rather like gerrymandering in the House. When democrats held the House for decades, there was PLENTY of gerrymandering but they didn't give a crap because it benefitted them. Suddenly the House seems locked into GOP hands for a long time and now, after 100 years or whatever, they are mad about gerrymandering.

[buck008]

Campaign Finance Reform is a joke. Its impossible. If the US ever passed such a thing, it would OBVIOUSLY mean that the US media would have MUCH more influence on the elections than ever.

The idea is to ban political ads or political campaign contributions to candidates. But it does not really regulate the mainstream media. So you have conservative activists like the Koch brothers who donate millions to candidates and causes. You stop them from doing it. Ok. So then they just BUY media outlets. They BUY CBS, NBC, ABC, or maybe Paramount Pictures. Then they start producing television shows and movies with their point of view. They get broadcast around the election.

Currently, people in favor of CFR aren't concerned with TV shows and movies making political statements around elections because Hollywood slants overwhelmingly liberal, and the people who want CFR are liberal. So they turn a total blind eye to it. But if CFR ever becomes reality, people like the Koch brothers will be FORCED to start buying media assets to make their political statements. And I'm sure the people in favor of CFR will suddenly notice that tv shows and movies DO in fact make political statements and can be viewed as advertising for an election.

Its rather like gerrymandering in the House. When democrats held the House for decades, there was PLENTY of gerrymandering but they didn't give a crap because it benefitted them. Suddenly the House seems locked into GOP hands for a long time and now, after 100 years or whatever, they are mad about gerrymandering.

Creating a movie or television show that espouses conservative values isn't exactly equal to handing a candidate money either.

Also both parties gerrymander, and both parties only bitch about it when it benefits the other guy. That doesn't make it right in either case, but don't pretend this is a "liberal" thing.

[Ivanstone]

Its rather like gerrymandering in the House. When democrats held the House for decades, there was PLENTY of gerrymandering but they didn't give a crap because it benefitted them. Suddenly the House seems locked into GOP hands for a long time and now, after 100 years or whatever, they are mad about gerrymandering.

Whilst gerrymandering is wrong in general, its especially wrong when the party with the minority of the vote retains control of the house. Kind of like how the Republicans have pulled off that feat twice in the modern era to the democrat's none.

[Felya]

Campaign Finance Reform is a joke. Its impossible. If the US ever passed such a thing, it would OBVIOUSLY mean that the US media would have MUCH more influence on the elections than ever.

Oh bullshit! We have more access to information, regardless of media, than ever in history. Blaming the media is just another way to devalue the voting public you disagree with. Corporate interest pays directly to help corporate interest. What interest is the media going to push, their corporate interest?