Supreme Court Left Donor Disclosure Rules Intact

Supreme Court Left Donor Disclosure Rules Intact

http://www.google.com/ig?brand=ACEW&bmod=EMUS#max12

by Peter Overby, January 25, 2010
View and comment on NPR.org
Democrats and liberals are still in shock after the Supreme Court last week allowed corporations to start spending money in political campaigns. But the same decision dealt a setback to some conservative activists by upholding laws requiring disclosure of political donors.

Writing for the majority in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Justice Anthony Kennedy said that transparency enables voters to make informed decisions and weigh different speakers and messages.

Silver Lining?

Tara Malloy, a lawyer at the Campaign Legal Center, which defends campaign finance laws, says that this part of the opinion is a silver lining.

"If anything, the court seemed to almost herald disclosure," Malloy says.

Most politicians generally seem to like disclosure. Last week, House Republication leader John Boehner did what GOP leaders in Congress have often done: He quoted long-ago liberal Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.

"I have always believed that sunshine was the best disinfectant," Boehner said.

according to the "confession" published in the NY time this weekend. So enjoy this while we can. It won't last.

are giving to campaigns. Candidates don't care at all.

a constitutional amendment to end this Corporate Personhood nonsense.

I remember in 1968 when some socialist friends were hoping for a Nixon win because they thought Nixon's right-wing insanity would so disgust the public that it would hasten the end of conservatism.

Didn't work that way.

Neither has it worked out really well on any other occasion I can recall when people were talking that way.

All that happens is that things get worse. Sometimes much worse. (Reagan, Bush II). I haven't seen that popular uprising yet, after 50 years of waiting for it.