Bribery, as defined by Black's Law Dictionary, is "The receiving or offering of any undue reward by or to any person whomsoever, whose ordinary profession or business related to the administration of public justice, in order to influence his behavior in office, and to incline him to act contrary to his duty and the known rules of honesty and integrity."
The"Fossil fuel industry lobbying expenditure and contributions to the U.S. Congress amounted to over $536 million in the 112th Congress (2011-12)." Oil Change International, explained, "North American oil and natural gas companies reported a combined $271 billion in profits last year. It said a "huge share" of the overall profits can't be accounted for, however, because private companies", Such as Koch Industries who Spent Twice as Much on the 2012 Election as the Top Ten Unions Combined, "aren't required to disclose their financial information."
In other words, an industry that doesn't even disclose their financial information, has been pushing for unlimited control of our political process that it plans to fund through an unlimited amount of dirty oil that it plans to transport through our waterways, with protection of politicians for the benefit of a elite few, and their stockholders, while putting our most fragile resource, drinking water, at risk.
This is why we cannot have renewable energy. Because Oil and Gas companies ensure that through manipulation of the government, that they can maintain their monopolies, manipulate the cost of energy, buy politicians and destroy Unions.
Why can't you spend your money in politics how ever you like?
“‘I just want to donate to more candidates,’ said McCutcheon, adding rhetorically: ‘Why am I not free to spend money however I want?’” Since the Supreme Court seems to not have an answer, let's look at SCOTUS precedent. One of the things that you should read is Buckley V. Valeo as it has already handled the subject that Roberts has mangled.
The prevention of corruption is essential not only to make government work for its intended purpose, e.g., ensure that public officials are using their office to further the public interest and not to enrich themselves or others, but also to preserve public confidence in the democratic process. As to the latter, the United States Supreme Court has observed: “[A] democracy is effective only if the people have faith in those who govern, and that faith is bound to be shattered when high officials and their appointees engage in activities which arouse suspicions of malfeasance and corruption.” (United States v. Miss. Valley Generating Co.)"In the 2006 election cycle, oil and gas companies contributed over $19 million to political campaigns. 82% of that money went to Republican candidates" (Wikipedia) of the oil lobbyists who brought this money to their republican allies, 75% of these lobbyists worked prior in regulation of the same industries. The result of the revolving door can be seen with the presence of carcinogens in the drinking water of millions of Americans, while "estimates of annual fossil fuel subsidies range from $14 billion to $52 billion annually."
In view of the fundamental nature of the right to associate, governmental "action which may have the effect of curtailing the freedom to associate is subject to the closest scrutiny." NAACP v. Alabama, supra, at 460-461. Yet, it is clear that "[n]either the right to associate nor the right to participate in political activities is absolute." CSC v. Letter Carriers, 413 U. S. 548, 567 (1973). Even a "'significant interference' with protected rights of political association" may be sustained if the State demonstrates a sufficiently important interest and employs means closely drawn to avoid unnecessary abridgment of associational freedoms. Cousins v. Wigoda, supra, at 488; NAACP v. Button, supra, at 438; Shelton v. Tucker, supra, at 488. Buckley V. Valeo
Instead, Republicans are perfectly fine with Sheldon Addleson and George Sorros deciding our leaders for us. I don't think this is how democracy should work. This is surely not how our constitution is framed. "The ruling, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, offers an oligarchic and anti-democratic reinterpretation of the First Amendment. Roberts argues, under the guise of defending “freedom of speech,” that the First Amendment protects the right of tiny layer of the population to unfettered control over the political system." WSW Allowing, millionaires donations to be substitutes for debate, dialogue, the democratic process and the electoral college.
Cheif Justice Roberts writes that “we have made clear that Congress may not regulate contributions simply to reduce the amount of money in politics, or to restrict the political participation of some in order to enhance the relative influence of others.” He adds, “Money in politics may at times seem repugnant to some, but so too does much of what the First Amendment vigorously protects.”
“If the First Amendment protects flag burning, funeral protests and Nazi parades – despite the profound offense such spectacles cause – it surely protects political campaign speech despite popular opinion.” This assassin opinion was given by our Supreme Court.
"In the (words) of the dissenting opinion in McCutcheon, delivered by Justice Breyer, along with Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, “Taken together with Citizens United…, today’s decision eviscerates our Nation’s campaign finance laws, leaving a remnant incapable of dealing with the grave problems of democratic legitimacy that those laws were intended to resolve.”