Citizens Repudiate Unlimited Corporate Campaign Spending

Last month's 5-4 ruling by the US Supreme Court, which said that corporations have a constitutional right to unlimited expenditures in elections, has sparked outrage among voters of all stripes. According to a poll released by the Washington Post today, four in five voters oppose the ruling. Two of every three voters (65% ) "strongly oppose" the ruling. Opposition was at super-majority strength in both parties -- 85% of Democrats, 76% of Republicans, and 81% of independents.

The high court ruling that prompted this united opposition came in a case called Citizens United v FEC. That Jan. 21 decision threw out over a century of federal law barring corporations from participating in elections. And it's just common sense that corporations can be excluded from elections. Corporations, for instance, don't vote. People vote. And corporations cannot write checks. People write checks; they may choose to do so from a corporate check-book, but it's a person who make the decision to spend money and where that money should come from. Insisting, as a 5-4 majority of the US Supreme Court has now done, that corporations (and unions and other non-persons) have a constitutional right to spend money on elections means that people who have access to corporate check-books have more abilities than to people who do not have access to corporate check-books. That's why so many voters, in both parties, are outraged.

ICPR has a Q&A on the ruling, including its effect on Illinois' new contribution limits law, here.

Court Ruling to Deliver $300M Boost to Media

Last week's US Supreme Court ruling in the case Citizens United has sparked a host of media stories about the implications for the future of campaign finance regulation. The ruling is over 180 pages long, and it will take some time before the dust all settles and the real impact can be seen.

In the meantime, here are some stories about the ruling that have not received much coverage in the press. The headline to this post is actually the banner headline in today's issue of Advertising Age. The media industry journal goes on to predict that, as a result of the Supreme Court's decision, media companies can "Expect More Money, More Clutter and No Inventory in November." In a related story, the journal predicts "Supreme Court Ruling Will Put Political Ad Spending 'on Steroids'."

Whatever the ruling may mean for democracy, it apparently also means more cash for media companies.