Re: [Corvallis Area MTA] My Request for Info on MT Case and MTA Collaboration with Other Groups
Maegan Prentice
Maegan
----- Original Message -----
From: Bart Bolger
Sent: 05/25/12 11:01 AM
To: corvallis-area...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [Corvallis Area MTA] My Request for Info on MT Case and MTA Collaboration with Other Groups
I just sent something to the MTA national listserve to get some information. I was not speaking for the group, obviously and I hope it's not taken that way. But I really feel at a loss trying to answer questions on these topics and I hope MTA gives us something to work with. If I get an official response, I'll post that here, for those not on the national listserve.
Here's my email to them.
========================
I apologize if I've missed something on this list, but what is the MTA position on the Montana case, as it currently stands (i.e., in the pending Supreme Court challenge)?
I've heard (can't remember where) that there is some concern that if the Supreme's rule in favor of MT, they might do so very narrowly and preclude other states from following suit, thus broadening the precedent of Citizens United while allowing MT to have their way.
We're being deluged with calls from groups like MoveOn and Daily Kos to sign petitions in favor of upholding the MT Supreme Court ruling, but I'm reluctant to push that stance until I know more.
Is MTA planning to join an amicus brief to the Supremes as many groups, legislators and state atty's gen'l have?
AND, what is the current state of play with our efforts to collaborate with other groups, e.g., Public Citizen, MoveOn, Common Cause? If that's too sensitive due to ongoing negotiations, I can accept that, but I would like some sort of current status statement we can use in our "elevator pitch" when talking to petition signers and local groups.
Thanks,
Bart Bolger
Corvallis (Oregon) Area Move to Amend
========================
Dana Allen
I second what Maegan said. Further, I really appreciate Bart trying to get some clarity from MTA national.
Onward!
Dana
Bart Bolger
Thanks,
Bart
On Friday, May 25, 2012 11:47:58 AM UTC-7, Maegan Prentice wrote:
This is why I have thought that we should not be pushing for the Supremes to be taking the case. If they did not take the case Montana's law would stand as it is and serve as a precedent (sp?) for other states to take the issue into their own hands. The ability of states and municipalities to take on issues for themselves can be a far more powerful tool when the government is immobilized by the politics of power.
Maegan
----- Original Message -----
From: Bart Bolger
Sent: 05/25/12 11:01 AM