The Daily Star, Oneonta, NY - otsego county news, delaware county news, oneonta news, oneonta sports

Editorials

May 30, 2012

Citizens United should be overturned

Twenty-two states -- led by New York -- and the District of Columbia are pushing for the Supreme Court to reconsider its 2010 Citizens United decision.

The 2010 ruling struck down much of the 2002 campaign-finance reform law, essentially lifting a federal ban on corporate campaign spending. It allowed each corporation to claim its "personhood" and the right to spend untold sums as part of First Amendment guarantees.

We have seen the results of the court's decision. It has turned our federal election system into a free-for-all for nameless, faceless corporate spending and the eruption of super political action committees disguised as independent entities.

And this is not just a Republican spending frenzy, as some may think, though a majority of the money spent by these super PACs has gone to the causes of GOP candidates. According to a story by The Associated Press, in May alone pro-President Barack Obama PAC Priorities USA Action -- run by former Obama White House aides -- spent $2.4 million on advertisements condemning GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney. The group had received $10 million by the end of March, the AP story said.

For the Romney camp, $4.3 million was spent for ads in May by Restore Our Future -- run by former Romney advisers. It has amassed at least $51 million since its creation.

These figures show the blatant disregard by corporations for the ability of independent voters to act and contribute for themselves as American citizens.

It does not seem enough for these super PACS and corporations that the candidates raise millions in more-conventional campaigning, such as fundraisers and donations from actual free-thinking people who want a stake in their future.

It is good to see states take up the fight against the Supreme Court's ruling. While they are hinging their arguments on keeping state campaign spending laws intact -- specifically in a Montana state court ruling on corporate expenditures -- the states' concerns offer the court an opportunity to reconsider its federal decision.

In the high court's defense, the justices have indicated they will consider whether the Montana ruling against state corporate campaign spending conflicts directly with the Citizens United decision or if state spending should be deemed separate from federal campaign contribution law. And if that means a re-examination and clarification of their decision, the justices are moving in the right direction.

Peter Schurman, spokesman for a group called Free Speech For People, correctly summed up the need for action in an AP story: "There is a growing bipartisan consensus that Citizens United needs to be overturned, and Montana is leading the way. The Supreme Court has an opportunity to revisit Citizens United here. That is important because there is evidence everywhere that unlimited spending in our elections creates both corruption and the appearance for corruption."

Text Only
Editorials

Additional Content
Join the Debate
Helium
Additional Resources
CNHI News Service
Poll

Which is the most important issue?

Benghazi
The IRS
The Associated Press subpoena
     View Results