In a prudent and circumspect display of judicial restraint, the Supreme Court overturned decades of legal precedent and laws enacted by the elected legislature, and made sure that our campaign laws honor the Original Intent of our Founding Fathers and adhere to the principle of “one dollar, one vote”.  (Canadian dollars are allowed 3/5ths of a vote.)  I didn’t read all the way to the end of the majority’s learned opinion, but I assume that George W. Bush is now President.  That’s how these things usually end, anyways.

I think Mark Schmitt has the appropriately sanguine reaction:

[I]t is important not to overstate the immediate effect on our political life. The “OMG, corporations are now people, with free speech rights!” reaction to the decision overlooks the fact that for almost all purposes, corporations do have free speech rights, and should, although they can be subject to balancing tests just as all rights are, as Scott shows. The principle area in which corporate rights are balanced has been around elections, in which speech rights are balanced against the interest in reducing corruption and, until the Austin precedent was overturned today, reducing the distorting effect of money on the process. [...]

Citizens United is not the end of the line for campaign finance reform. It’s just the end of the line for the traditional kind of reform that relies primarily on futile efforts to limit spending, such as the McCain-Feingold Act. Real reform that expands the ability of candidates and citizens to speak and to be heard is alive and well, and is now the only path to a fair political process.

Until that happens, the bidding for my vote starts at $6.

About these ads