By David Swanson

While new disclosure laws on corporate political spending are not needed to see the forest, they may be required for seeing the trees. Knowing which corporations funded what won't, on its own, end or reduce the corruption. And the big picture of corporate spending cannot easily be hidden. Already, pre-Citizens United, it dominated Washington. And the threat alone of massively increased spending is corrupting Washington further already. But those who, for various reasons, think we need to see the details, or would be helped by seeing the details, require new legislation.

"Higher Corporate Spending on Election Ads Could Be All but Invisible," reads a headline on ProPublica:

We are very excited to bring you an exclusive online live video chat with Michael Moore as part of the DVD and Blue-ray release of ‘Capitalism: A Love Story'.

The 30 minute session will be on Tuesday, March 16th at 3:00 pm EST at Brave New Films site:
http://bravenewfilms.org/michaelmoore

Foreign contributions banned in an addition to campaign bill

NEXT STEP: Measure advances to House Judiciary Committee.

By RICHARD MAUER, Anchorage Daily News

JUNEAU -- A House committee added a ban on foreign campaign contributions Tuesday to a bill designed to counter some of the effects of a Supreme Court decision that freed corporations and unions to spend unlimited money on elections.

By David Swanson, FreeSpeechForPeople

The damage from the Supreme Court's decision in "Citizens United v. FEC" continues to spread as feared. Newly emboldened corporations are suing to overturn state laws that restrict corporate spending on politics:

"A pro-natural resource development group [how's that for spin?] and a Bozeman painting company asked a Helena District Court on Monday to strike down Montana’s 1912 ban on corporate donations and expenditures to political campaigns to comply with a January U.S. Supreme Court ruling."

Meanwhile, the new third branch of government (the other two being the Democratic and Republican parties), the institution that had predicted in an amicus brief that it would be the largest beneficiary of "Citizens United," is now becoming just that. Here's an LA Times headline: