Thursday, January 21, 2010

Filthy Lucre.

If you thought that campaign ads funded by corporations intent on buying their way in had reached their saturation point during the last election cycle, you ain't seen nothin' yet, compliments of the conservative-controlled Supreme Court of the United States.

Corpocracy in action, now turbocharged to the nth degree by five fuckwads in flowing robes.

Viewers in media markets nationwide are already well familiar with being bombarded with ads either supporting or criticizing candidates for Congress and the White House in the months before an election. But that could be nothing compared with what today's landmark Supreme Court campaign-finance decision appears to invite, experts say.
The ruling removes limits on corporations from spending their money on federal races, meaning that companies -- and probably labor unions -- will be free, for instance, to buy up advertising time days and weeks before an election to support or attack a potential candidate, perhaps creating slick spots with high production values similar to drug or car ads, or purchasing large blocks of network time.
Previously, federal law prohibited corporations and unions from using their treasuries to advocate for a specific candidate, allowing them to express themselves only through political action committees that were tightly regulated. They will still be prevented from donating money directly to campaigns even after today's decision.
What remains to be seen is how many corporations avail themselves of their new freedom. Right now, many already chose to contribute to groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as a form of campaign advocacy. They may continue do so to avoid being so closely identified with a specific candidate or race.
Before today's decision, groups such as the chamber, as well as labor unions, could not run ads expressly to support or defeat a candidate and were required to air so-called issue ads instead. Critics have long charged, however, that those ads acted as simple proxies for direct campaign ads, and some say today's ruling will simply result in an even greater proliferation of such ads.
Democrats and campaign finance reform advocates were highly critical of the court's decision.
"The Supreme Court just predetermined the winners of next November's elections," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) "It won't be Republicans. It won't be Democrats. It will be corporate America."
Schumer and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), the chairman of the Democratic House reelection effort, said they would offer legislation to try to scale back the reach of the decision before November's congressional elections.
More money, more cash, more hoes...

BeltwayBlips: vote it up!

No comments: