Beware: Citizens United hopes for Fascist victory

Bear with me for a bit on some historical context concerning campaign finance before I get to the impending Fascist insanity.

The first campaign finance law in was enacted in 1867. Over the years, according to the Federal Election Commission’s website, Congress has enacted further campaign finance legislation in order to:

“- Limit contributions to ensure that wealthy individuals and special interest groups did not have a disproportionate influence on Federal elections;
- Prohibit certain sources of funds for Federal campaign purposes;
- Control campaign spending; and
- Require public disclosure of campaign finances to deter abuse and to educate the electorate.”

A giant step was taken in 1907 with the Tillman Act, which banned contributions to Federal campaigns from corporations and banks. The Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 went further, barring labor unions and corporations from campaign spending.

During the 1970s, campaign finance law again came to the forefront, starting with the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) and the Revenue Act of 1971. The FECA required full reporting of campaign contributions and expenditures, as well as put spending limits on media ads. It also allowed an exception where unions and corporations could use treasury funds to run Political Action Committees, through which contributions could be used for campaign purposes.

The constitutionality of these acts was debated soon after. In Buckley vs. Valeo in 1976 the Supreme Court stated that the contribution limits were indeed constitutional, given the importance of election integrity. The Court did, however, overturn the expenditure limits. The opinion was that a cap on expenditures was an imposition on political speech, while limiting contributions was not as much so. Basically, “spend whatever you want, but we’re still going to watch where it comes from.” As well, they decided that spending limits on publicly funded candidates were constitutional because candidates could opt out of public financing if they wished.

Now, why is any of that relevant? Well, we are all aware that corporate entities have, seemingly since their birth, been on the prowl to remove any blockades to their influence in the political sphere. It also appears that since the 1980s they have made great progress toward returning us to the late 1800s. And now on the near horizon is more Supreme Court activity that will undoubtedly turn this battle in their favor to an even more dangerous extent.

A right-wing group called Citizens United, and their lawyer, Theodore Olsen are attempting to overturn the corporate spending ban upheld in Austin vs. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, as well as McCain-Feingold. Of course, John Roberts and his corporate cronies on the Court are more than willing to hear this case, Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission.

In the 1990 Austin case, the Supreme Court decided that the Michigan campaign finance law that prohibited corporations from using treasury funds in elections did not violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

The First Amendment is obviously the free speech side of the debate that we are all aware of.. Money is speech. That’s bad enough.

Now, the argument that the right-wing makes concerning the Fourteenth Amendment is quite the twist. The post-Civil War amendment involves the definition of personhood in the wake of slavery, meant to establish the rights of citizenship. Because the term ‘person’ is used and not ‘natural person’, they claim that corporations, or ‘artificial persons’ deserve the same rights as actual people.

Justices Roberts, Alito, and Scalia, especially, have a history of favoring corporate America over the people. They jump at any chance to increase the political influence of the elite financial powers that hope to control our lives. Justice Thomas will vote with these three because he can‘t eat breakfast without Scalia‘s approval.. Justice Kennedy, the usual swing vote, will also vote with them, as he always does on corporate matters.

Hence, in September, when this case is heard, there will undoubtedly be a 5-4 vote that will legalize Fascism in America, possibly to the greatest extent allowed thus far. Corporate America will be on its way to true personhood and a free-for-all in political spending can ensue; a right-wing utopia come to fruition. It is doubtful that the same courtesy would be handed to the unions or other groups that represent the ‘natural people‘ of this country.

This is an offensive and dangerous trend that has gained steam recently, along with most other right-wing agenda items since the 1980s. Bush’s court appointments may turn out to be the most significant factor in the fight. His legacy, as we know, will live much longer than his despicable eight years in office.

So pay attention late this summer, when the news is telling you to be very afraid of Socialism and the perils of health-care for all, it will probably go unreported that Fascism has been made constitutional in America.