Admittedly, it was a leaky dam to begin with, but the US Supreme Court may have just opened the floodgates on fundraising for political advertising. At least that’s what Mr. President proclaimed in last night’s State of the Union.
(b/t/w: How cool would it be, just once, before both chambers of Congress and a worldwide TV audience, to give the Supreme Court a dressing down all the way to their briefs? 5/9ths of them, anyway.
The case in question, Citizens United v. FEC, was a challenge to the constitutionality of efforts to limit corporate spending on political advertising.
Along classic red/blue, donkey/elephant, liberal/conservative ideological lines the only people in America with the word Justice on the title line of their business cards overturned precedents at the very heart of campaign finance reform.
Now, I don’t see party. [Kind of like Colbert doesn’t see race. You could wear a U.S. flag do-rag and pleasure yourself to Ann Colter or drive a 73 Volvo wagon and recycle your used TP. I wouldn't be able to guess your political affiliation.]
Plus, I can’t tell which side really stands to benefit here. Particularly with the way Obama has so successfully delivered on his message of change by moving the mantle of hand puppet for big money over to the Democrats.
It will, however, spur no end of fascinating ethical issues for the advertising industry.
What happens when our biggest clients become the NRA, AFL-CIO, MoveOn, Swift Boat Veterans or the US Chamber of Commerce?
Personally, I’m afraid.
I run a corporation, but my general sense is that it already has more than its share of representation. Far more than me – as a voter. And particularly at a time when our access to actual news is disintegrating right before our iPhones.
As for me, I prefer campaigns built on ideas, not dollars.
2 Comments
Andrew Sullivan, and others, noted this was the first time the Supreme Court used the term "blog" in an opinion. In fact, YouTube got it's first supreme judicial mention, too.
"Today, 30-second television ads may be the most effective way to convey a political message. Soon, however, it may be that Internet sources, such as blogs and social networking Web sites, will provide citizens with significant information about political candidates and issues. Yet, §441b would seem to ban a blog post expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate if that blog were created with corporate funds. The First Amendment does not permit Congress to make these categorical distinctions based on the corporate identity of the speaker and the content of the political speech," - Justice Anthony Kennedy, marking the first time "blog" has been used in a Supreme Court opinion.
Prescient Humor:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/supreme_court_allows
One Trackback
[...] interesting that within a few weeks of the airwaves being opened up to unregulated corporate expenditures on political advertising we’re about to get a prime time example of what happens when opinions are pitched to us like [...]