FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 26, 2007
CONTACT: Tim Rusch, Demos Press Office
press@demos.org / (212) 633-1405
DEMOS RESPONDS TO SUPREME COURT RULING ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE CASE
"DECISION UPHOLDS INFLUENCE OF SPECIAL INTERESTS ON AMERICA'S ELECTIONS; OVERTURNS 2003 DECISION THAT LIMITED CORPORATE SPENDING ON CAMPAIGNS"
Boston, MA--The US Supreme Court issued a decision this week upholding the influence of for-profit corporations on US elections, loosening restrictions in the McCain-Feingold law that barred large corporate expenditures for campaign ads. In response to this action, which effectively overruled a 2003 decision on campaign finance, Brenda Wright, Legal Director for the voting rights and civic-participation center Demos who also argued the recent Randall v. Sorrell Supreme Court campaign finance case, issued the following statement:
"The outcome in Monday's campaign finance case, FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, is a disappointing development for all those seeking to preserve our democracy against the distorting influence of wealth in the political process. The decision finds First Amendment protection for the entities that need it least--powerful corporations determined to use their economic clout to attain political influence. And it does so by silently overruling the Supreme Court's 2003 decision upholding the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 ("BCRA"/McCain-Feingold Act) against a facial constitutional challenge--a court decision that many state legislatures have relied upon over the past four years in seeking to draft campaign finance laws that would withstand constitutional scrutiny.
"The campaign ads at issue in the case were funded heavily by for-profit corporate contributions, even though they were run by a non-profit corporation, Wisconsin Right to Life. Indeed, the for-profit corporate source of the donations is the sole reason the BCRA regulations came into play. BCRA's regulation of corporate and union-funded electioneering communications was necessary if BCRA's ban on huge soft-money donations to federal candidates was to be meaningful. The Court's decision striking down regulation of such ads thus undermines BCRA's ability to limit special-interest influence in Congress, while leaving untouched the huge increases in hard-money donations that were added to BCRA as a 'compromise' to assure passage. The result skews the electoral process even more markedly toward the wealthiest interests, distorting our democracy.
"The close 5-4 vote on this case underscores the fragility of the gains we have made in achieving fair and equal political participation and securing an electoral process that serves the needs of all. Demos staff have long been involved in the effort to limit corporate domination of the political process, to restrain the role of money in politics, and to elevate the role of ordinary citizens in our electoral system. Demos will work with other reform advocates to limit the negative impact of today's decision and, in the long term, to build an understanding of the Constitution that serves to protect our democracy rather than undermine it."
For more information: www.demos.org.
