Citizens United vs. FEC

No.08-205. Argued March 24, 2009---Re-argued September 9, 2009---Decided January 21, 2010

...As amended by...the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, federal law prohibits corporations...from using their general treasury funds to make independent expenditures for speech that is an "electioneering communication" or for speech that expressly advocates the election or defeat of a candidate...

...The Court has recognized that the First Amendment applies to corporations...and extended this protection to the context of political speech...

...The First Amendment prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for engaging in political speech... ...The judgment of the District Court is reversed...It is so ordered.

The following is from The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck:

"The owners of the land came onto the land, or more often a spokesman for the owners came. ...Some of the owner men were kind because they hated what they had to do, and some of them were angry because they hated to be cruel, and some of them were cold because they had long ago found that one could not be an owner unless one were cold. And all of them were caught in something larger than themselves...If a bank or a finance company owned the land, the owner man said, The Bank -- or the Company -- needs -- wants -- insists -- must have -- as though the Bank or the Company were a monster, with thought and feeling, which had ensnared them. These last would take no responsibility for the banks or the companies because they were men and slaves, while the banks were machines and masters all at the same time...The owner men sat in the cars and explained. You know the land is poor. You've scrabbled at it long enough, God knows.

The squatting tenant men nodded and wondered and drew figures in the dust, and yes, they knew, God knows. If the dust only wouldn't fly. If the top would only stay on the soil, it might not be so bad...

Well, it's too late. And the owner men explained the workings and the thinkings of the monster that was stronger than they were....You see, a bank or a company...those creatures don't breathe air, don't eat side-meat. They breathe profits; they eat the interest on money....We have to do it. We don't like to do it. But the monster's sick....

Sure, cried the tenant men, but it's our land. We measured it and broke it up. We were born on it, and we got killed on it, died on it. Even if it's no good, it's still ours...

We're sorry. It's not us. It's the monster. The bank isn't like a man.

Yes, but the bank is only made of men.

No, you're wrong there--quite wrong there. The bank is something else than men. It happens that every man in a bank hates what the bank does, and yet the bank does it. The bank is something more than men, I tell you. It's the monster. Men made it, but they can't control it."

And the Supreme Court has further enshrined that the monster is entitled to all the rights of a citizen.

I have long ago altered Lincoln's famous words to more properly reflect what has happened to this failed Democracy known as the United States of America. What we have now is Government of the Corporations, by the Corporations, and for the Corporations.

Thankfully, full disclosure is still required. In his opinion, Justice Clarence "pubic hair on my Pepsi" Thomas rails against not protecting anonymous speech. As his examples he cites the occurrences in California where individuals who donated to the Pro Proposition 8 cause were subject to calls for boycotts and resignations. Justice Thomas would prefer that the money be hidden and secret.

I recall an incident here in Marquette in which the very Republican owner of a popular local business decided to put large political signs up in front of his business in support of the Republican candidate for Congress. He was outraged when a boycott was organized against his business. He wrongly (IMHO) felt that somehow his freedom of speech was being taken away from him. Clarence Thomas apparently would have agreed.

However, he chose to politicize his business and the consumers of this heavily Democratic and unionized county chose to vote with their dollars. What could be more American than that? Therefore, disappointed as I am in the decision, the disclosure of donated money will trigger all kinds of boycotts and calls for support in coming years by political consumers. I am thankful for the internet and for the social networking sites that will make instant boycotts our only weapon against corporate money.

In Chicago in the late 80's, the boys in Boys Town decided to stop drinking Miller products because of Philip Morris' support of right wing anti-gay politicians. Although some whined that we were only punishing the local distributor, Miller/Phillip Morris eventually figured out that the boys of Boys Town drink a lot of beer. I haven't been to a Pride Parade in a number of years now, but I recall fondly watching the big Miller truck take it's place among the other floats and groups.

Be aware Corporate America, we will be watching where every penny goes so choose how you spend wisely or suffer the consequences. This might be a great spot to remind you all to switch your money to local community banks and credit unions and out of the pockets of Wall Street Banks. Peace.