4
street roots
Jan. 20. 2012
COMMENTARY
D
,
,
•
p.
.
.
Protesters m Denver rally against Citizens United, a conservative political group at the heart of the corporate personhood decision by the U.S. Supreme Court.
R E U TE R S /R IC K W IL K IN G
Corporations aren’t people — except in politics
BY JANICE THOM PSON
Citizens United decision as a fundamental
and PACs. The Buckley court, however,
assault on democracy. An accountant and
found that due to the independent nature of
small business owner supported the
this type of political spending from these
ARTICLE 1 - Portland City Council
resolution
and
stressed
that
it
was
not
anti
groups, there is no potential for corruption.
says that corporations aren’t people
business.
The court also rejected other reasons for
The only opposition came from an
regulating independent expenditures such
n Jan. 12, the Portland City Council
individual concerned that the resolution
as fairness or leveling the playing field.
adopted a resolution in support of
wasn’t fair and the American Civil Liberties
This means that even before the Citizens
amending the U .S. Constitution to
Union of Oregon, whose representative
United decision there were independent
address the Citizens United decision and
instead urged support for public financing
expenditures in federal campaigns, just
the notions that money equals speech and
reform and rigorous campaign finance
none paid with corporate treasury dollars.
corporations are people.
disclosure requirements.
Before Citizens United there was a
Portland joined New York City, Los
The vote was 3-0 with Commissioners
history of regulation on corporate political
Angeles, and a growing number of other
Nick Fish and Dan Saltzman absent. The
spending that began with the 1907 Tillman
cities in objecting to corporations being
Portland Alliance for Democracy reports
Act. In 1947, the Taft-Hartly Act barred
given undue constitutional protections. One
that Fish had indicated support for the
labor unions and corporations from making
feature of the Portland resolution is that it
resolution prior to his absence.
expenditures and contributions in federal
also urges regulating independent
elections.
These limits were such
expenditures, like those made by super
established law that they weren’t part of the
PACs (political action committees) in the
litigation that led to the Buckley decision.
presidential primaries. The resolution also
ARTICLE 2 - What did Citizens
In 1990, Austin v. Michigan Chamber of
requires the city attorney to assess the legal
United do?
Commerce was upheld by the U .S. Supreme
feasibility for the council to refer an
The Citizens United decision by the U.S.
Court and described the reason for
advisory question for a popular vote.
Supreme Court focused on one aspect of
regulating corporate political spending as
Mayor Sam Adams introduced the
the flow of money in federal candidate
the “corrosive and distorting effects of
resolution and said, “The discussion in front
campaigns: independent expenditures,
immense aggregations of wealth that are
of us is not a big rhetorical discussion about
which are payments for electioneering for or
• accumulated with the help of the corporate
whether corporations are good or bad. It
against a candidate that are produced
form and that have little or no correlation to
depends on the corporation. This resolution
independently of the candidate.
the public’s support for the corporation’s
is about what kind of electoral system the
Independent expenditures are treated
political ideas.”
U .S. wants to design.”
differently from direct contributions due to
This Austin rationale was the key factor
The opening panel of testifiers included
two elements of the Buckley v. Valeo
in
upholding McCain-Feingold regulations
representatives of Portland Move to Amend,
decision. The 1976 Buckley decision
on use of corporate treasury dollars for
Portland Alliance for Democracy, Occupy
addressed reforms adopted in the Federal
electioneering. These were the regulations
Portland, and Common Cause Oregon.
Election Campaign Act (FECA) as amended
of concern to the nonprofit group Citizens
Occupy Portland’s advocacy was a critical
in 1974 in response to reports of serious
United regarding contributions for
tipping point for action by the City Council
financial abuses in the 1972 Presidential
distribution of its movie about Hillary
on a topic that Portland Move to Amend and campaign.
Clinton.
Alliance for Democracy began to work on in
Buckley upheld limits on direct
The Citizens United decision overturned
early 2011. Many other groups also testified
contributions to candidates because free
Austin and eliminated the part of McCain-
in support including a representative from
speech concerns were outweighed by the
Feingold that regulated corporate-
the Program on Corporation, Law &
potential for corruption or the appearance
independent electioneering. The Citizens
Democracy that began its work to abolish all
of corruption.
United decision upheld legal provisions
constitutional rights for corporations 15
Putting limits on direct candidate
about campaign finance disclosure but
years ago.
contributions, though, sets the stage for
inaction by the Federal Elections
More than a dozen city residents spoke
independent expenditures. This is why
Commission and Congress to update these
as individuals in support for this local
FECA included limits on independent
action, citing corporate personhood and the
expenditures from individuals, associations
C O N T R IB U T IN G W R IT E R
Ja n ice Thompson is
the executive director
fo r Com m on Cause
Oregon. She is the
form er head o f
Democracy Reform
Oregon (which was
previously known as
the M oney in Politics
Research Action
Project). Com m on
Cause is a
nonpartisan,
nonprofit advocacy
organization founded
as a vehicle fo r
citizens to make their
voices heard in the
political process and
to hold their elected
leaders accountable to
the public interest.
O
See CORPORATIONS, page 5