Last week the Supreme Court decided, in "Citizens United v. the Federal Elections Commission [5]" that corporations have a right to support or oppose candidates for public office. The left is howling. Adam McKay writes [6] in the HuffPo:
the recent Supreme Court decision on Citizens United v. FEC is so assaultive and destructive towards our country and the welfare of our democracy...
Editorials in the New York Times and the Washington Post echo the idea that evil corporations will now have tremendous power over politicians. They are taking their cue from the president himself, who said the ruling “opens the floodgates” for unlimited special interest money to flow “into our democracy.” Teh White House and Congress are both busy with plans to limit the effects of the ruling.
"Our" democracy indeed. The case was not about big business but rather a small non-profit, Citizens United, which was airing ads promoting its video critical of Hilary Clinton. It puts corporations on a level playing field with unions--a fact that no doubt fuels the left's outrage--and with citizens themselves. It also takes the state of play back to the early 20th century when, ironically, corporations sought protection against politicians dunning them for campaign contributions. With the Chicago Mafia in the White House, they may well be wary of the decision.
Adam C Bonin provides a more non-partisan appraisal [7]of the opinion. It is worth reading in full, but here's a key quote:
The Court's decision today empowers corporate speakers to engage in virtually unlimited independent advertising, across all forms of media, to promote or oppose federal, state and local candidates for office.
That has to be good for free speech. But why rely on a biased press for opinions? In the information age, you can read the Court's decision [5] for yourself online.
