|
Supreme Court Opens Up
Campaign Finance to Corporations & Labor Unions
By Jim Malone
22 January 2010
The U.S. Supreme Court
issued a long-awaited decision on campaign finance laws Thursday that
opens the way for corporations and labor unions to have an even greater
impact on the U.S. elections process.
A sharply divided Supreme Court, by a vote of five to four, struck down
campaign finance laws going back decades that had imposed limits on
political contributions from corporations. The ruling is also expected
to apply to labor unions and activist groups.
The high court ruling could open the money floodgates for corporations
and unions, making it easier for them to run their own campaign ads on
behalf of or against political candidates. In the 2008 election cycle
alone, nearly six billion dollars was spent on all federal campaigns for
president and Congress.
The high court's five-member conservative majority equated limits on
campaign contributions from corporations with constitutionally
unacceptable limits on free speech. Justice Anthony Kennedy said that
limits on political speech were unjustified, and the majority struck
down laws that had placed limits on the amount of money corporations and
unions could spend on election campaigns.
Conservative and libertarian groups welcomed the Supreme Court decision,
including Steve Simpson with the Institute for Justice. He spoke to
reporters in front of the Supreme Court.
"The Supreme Court recognized today that the purpose of the First
Amendment is to allow individuals and Americans to speak out as loudly
and as robustly as they please," he said. "That applies whether an
individual chooses to speak out alone or whether he chooses to associate
with others and speak out as a group."
The court's liberal four-member minority opposed the change. In his
written dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said the ruling threatens to
undermine the integrity of elected institutions around the nation.
A written statement from President Obama at the White House said the
high court's decision opens the way to a stampede of special interest
money in American politics.
Among those speaking out in opposition was Democratic Senator Charles
Schumer of New York.
"Today's ruling, decided by the slimmest of majorities, guts our system
of free and fair elections," he said. "The bottom line is this. The
Supreme Court has just predetermined the winners of next November's
elections. It won't be Republicans. It won't be Democrats. It will be
corporate America."
The high court ruling does not change a ban on direct contributions to
candidates from corporations and labor unions that originated back in
1907.
Government
watchdog groups that monitor corruption and the influence of special
interests said the Supreme Court ruling opens the way for corporations
and labor unions to exert even more influence on the elections process.
Bob Edgar is president of the monitoring group Common Cause:
"We need to recognize that money has influenced the debate here in
Washington for too long," said Edgar. "All you have to do is look at the
housing crisis, the investment crisis, the banking crisis. Even this
health care debate was already tainted by how much money had flooded
into the system. The elected officials in the House and Senate are going
to end up serving special interests even more than they do today and not
the public's interest."
The ruling will apply to this year's congressional midterm elections in
November and could lead to a barrage of corporate and union sponsored
television ads during the campaign that were previously restricted.
The case stemmed from a conservative group's challenge of campaign
finance laws as part of an effort to promote a movie critical of
then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in 2008. |