Supreme Court Ruling Draws Sharp Criticism and Calls for Fair Elections

Just moments after the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 5-4 ruling opening the floodgates to corporate money in politics, respected leaders from government, media, and business began to speak out to show their outrage and disappointment.

President Obama forcefully condemned the ruling:
"With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington--while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates. That's why I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately with Congress on this issue. We are going to talk with bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing less."

The New York Times editorial board called the ruling a “blow to democracy” and endorsed citizen funded elections as an important remedy:
"The ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission radically reverses well-established law and erodes a wall that has stood for a century between corporations and electoral politics … Congress and members of the public who care about fair elections and clean government need to mobilize right away, a cause President Obama has said he would join. Congress should repair the presidential public finance system and create another one for Congressional elections to help ordinary Americans contribute to campaigns. "

The Washington Post called the ruling "unnecessary, wrong, and dangerous":
"This result was unnecessary because the court's conservative majority -- including supposed exemplars of judicial modesty -- lunged to make a broad constitutional ruling when narrower grounds were available. It was wrong because nothing in the First Amendment dictates that corporations must be treated identically to people. And it was dangerous because corporate money, never lacking in the American political process, may now overwhelm both the contributions of individuals and the faith they may harbor in their democracy.

Republican senators John McCain and Olympia Snowe were “disappointed” in the ruling and their colleague Russ Feingold called the decision “a terrible mistake.”

And Charles Kolb, President of the Committee for Economic Development, a business-led policy group, reminded us that many business leaders are equally critical of the Supreme Court’s overreach:
"The five Supreme Court justices who supported this decision have now opened the door to massive spending in the election process by American corporations; they have abandoned years of anti-corruption work; and they have ensured that the voice of average voters will be further reduced in our federal election system. Polls conducted by CED and others consistently show that a strong majority of business leaders favor campaign finance reform and limits on corporate spending on elections. I am hopeful that the Congress will again step in and enact campaign finance reform that reduces the influence of large contributors in federal elections."

Here at You Street, we are encouraged to hear so many speak out on behalf of the right of American citizens to a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. In this unfortunate decision lies an unprecedented opportunity to galvanize the country around the single-best solution to our electoral worries: citizen funded elections. Tell Congress to pass the Fair Elections Now Act and ensure that our leaders work for their constituents, not special interests and corporations.