… James Kwak’s discussion on The Baseline Scenario of a possible constitutional amendment to reverse the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United? That decision, of course, tied corporations’ right to campaign for or against electoral candidates to the First Amendment right of free speech. Kwak doubts that a sufficient number of state legislatures would cooperate since, in the current ultra-partisan climate, any limit on corporate spending in elections would be seen as a plus for Democrats.
Two quick thoughts:
– It’s quite possible that the impact of Citizens United on public policy will be more apparent than real. The decision does not guarantee corporations the right to give money to candidates directly. And in any event, corporations haven’t had much difficulty making their opinions count in spite of legal limits on indirect spending.
– Who needs Republicans to foil an amendment? The group with the clearest, most focused interest in keeping Citizens United in force is the lobbying industry, which knows a thing or two about influencing state legislatures.
