{"id":231108,"date":"2010-01-26T10:30:50","date_gmt":"2010-01-26T15:30:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/washingtonindependent.com\/?p=74764"},"modified":"2010-01-26T10:30:50","modified_gmt":"2010-01-26T15:30:50","slug":"a-legislative-fix-to-citizens-united","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/231108","title":{"rendered":"A Legislative Fix to Citizens United"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Since last week&#8217;s Supreme Court <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2010\/01\/22\/us\/politics\/22scotus.html?ref=todayspaper\" >decision<\/a> freeing corporations to spend unlimited sums to influence elections, there&#8217;s been a great deal of debate about what Congress, short of amending the Constitution, could do to prevent the nation&#8217;s big businesses from buying even more influence in Washington than they&#8217;ve already got.<\/p>\n<p>Today, Yale law professors Bruce Ackerman and Ian Ayres offer a solution. Writing in The Washington Post, the campaign finance reformers <a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2010\/01\/25\/AR2010012502970.html\" >propose<\/a> a new statute to keep the financing restrictions in place for any companies doing business with the federal government (i.e., most of the country&#8217;s biggest corporations). Using the drug lobby as an illustration, they explain:<span id=\"more-74764\"><\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Federal contractors already are not allowed to &#8220;directly or indirectly . . . make any contribution of money or other things of value&#8221; to &#8220;any political party, committee, or candidate.&#8221; This provision arguably bars Big Pharma from launching a media campaign in favor of a candidate who supports its special deals, thereby &#8220;indirectly providing&#8221; the candidate something &#8220;of value.&#8221; But it doesn&#8217;t cover the case in which contractors threaten to spend millions to oppose senators and representatives who refuse their excessive demands.<\/p>\n<p>There is a need, then, for a new statutory initiative: The same anti-corruption rationale may prohibit contractors from spending millions in favor of candidates requires a statutory prohibition on a negative advertising blitz.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>It wouldn&#8217;t be difficult to imagine, for example, the drug industry going after Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who&#8217;s been pushing <a href=\"http:\/\/washingtonindependent.com\/60782\/baucus-scores-a-win-for-big-pharma\" >a proposal<\/a> to empower states to negotiate pharmaceutical prices for their lowest-income seniors. (The prohibition on those negotiations has been a cash cow for the drug companies.)<\/p>\n<p>Ackerman and Ayres predict that their proposal would withstand the scrutiny of even the conservative-leaning Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>The Roberts court is skeptical &#8212; to put it mildly &#8212; of campaign finance restrictions. But it is still highly unlikely that the justices would strike down a law targeting federal contractors. All nine recognize that Congress may restrict free speech when there is a significant risk of corruption. That risk is obvious when corporate speakers are simultaneously doing business with the government.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Of course, with just 10 months to go before November&#8217;s midterms, Congress would have to act quickly &#8212; not something it&#8217;s exactly known for.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Since last week&#8217;s Supreme Court decision freeing corporations to spend unlimited sums to influence elections, there&#8217;s been a great deal of debate about what Congress, short of amending the Constitution, could do to prevent the nation&#8217;s big businesses from buying even more influence in Washington than they&#8217;ve already got. Today, Yale law professors Bruce Ackerman [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4315,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-231108","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/231108","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4315"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=231108"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/231108\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=231108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=231108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=231108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}