Litigation

Some Businesses Boost Political Spending After ?Citizens United?

By Peter Hardin

New reports are surfacing across the country of businesses and special interests working to exert more political influence in elections, following the Supreme Court’s landmark Citizens United v. FEC decision. Judicial elections are among the targets.

“An organization is being formed to coordinate spending by businesses interested in electing sympathetic judges. It plans to gear up next year,” reported an article in the Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle. The article was headlined, “Businesses look for more state election influence.”

While Georgia corporations in the past were permitted to pump unlimited dollars into independent expenditures, “signs point to increased corporate involvement,” the article said.

In Minnesota, an umbrella group funded by state businesses has begun airing a TV ad supporting Tom Emmer, a Republican gubernatorial hopeful, according to a Minnesota Public Radio report. It referred specifically to the impact of Citizens United:

“Because of a U.S Supreme Court ruling earlier this year, those businesses and other companies are now allowed to spend corporate money to influence elections. That court ruling, along with an open governor’s race, means political spending will dramatically increase from the last governor’s race.”

With an eye to numerous elections, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has pledged to raise $75 million, more than twice the amount it raised in 2008, Newsweek has reported, and a Republican fundraising group tied to Karl Rove has pledged to raise $52 million.

According to a Politico article, that political operation has “formed a spinoff group last month that – thanks in part to its ability to promise donors anonymity – has brought in more money in its first month than the parent organization has raised since it started in March.”

A NPR report, meanwhile, recaps House-passed legislation that has stalled in the U.S. Senate to require disclosure of corporate and labor union spending to influence elections.

Democratic sponsors hope to get a vote in the House before Election Day on another bill, for public financing of congressional elections, but it is uncertain whether they will succeed.

Citizens United changed the rules for corporation and labor unions, permitting them unlimited spending to influence elections through expenditures made independently of candidates’ campaigns.

You can read about the disclosure bill in Congress from this earlier Gavel Grab post. You can learn why Justice at Stake said the Citizens United decision posed grave dangers to America?s elected state courts by clicking here, or you can click here to see the JAS amicus brief in the case.

Full post as published by The Gavel on July 21, 2010 (boomark / email).