Campaign finance: newfound corporate power.

• Author: Waller, Jeff
• Position: LEGAL SPEAK

One person--one vote; one corporation--no vote.

But now corporations can influence an election through independent political advertising, and in states like Alaska, this means basically unlimited spending on advertisements.

Business and politics will never be the same.

The recent United States Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission eliminated prohibitions that kept corporations from paying for political advertisements. The Court held that corporations (and by extension unions and other forms of business) have a right to free speech and should be allowed to purchase political advertisements, so long as they do so independent of a candidate, to either support or oppose a candidate.

This recognition of a right of free speech involving politics in entities that are not a natural person has some voters and politicians up in arms. After all, a corporation cannot vote, so what place does it have in trying to influence the outcome of an election? On the other side, is a corporation or a union expressing its view about a candidate that much different from you or me trying to convince our family and friends to support or oppose a particular politician? The idea is the same; it is the scale that differs. And it is this difference of scale that is causing apprehension in many people. In a Washington Post-ABC News poll, more than three-quarters of the people responding, Democrats, Independents and Republicans alike, all disapproved of the idea of corporations and unions being able to voice their support or opposition to candidates. According to the Los Angeles Times, President Obama expressed concerns about the decision and the possibility of large corporations using this ruling to drown out the voices of the people.

Like any newfound power, the right of corporations and unions to independently advertise in elections has the potential for substantial abuse, but also carries with it the possibility of a substantial benefit. Is the Supreme Court's decision an opening for out-of-state companies, foreign companies and foreign governments to influence the outcome of our elections through big money corporate political advertisement spending, or is this an opportunity for businesses and unions to educate and inform the public on crucial political matters effecting business?

POSSIBLE ABUSES

One of the many possible abuses includes corporations from other states using political advertisements to push an agenda that is contrary...