Editorial:
Democracy is a form of government by the people, meaning that a majority rules. This week the Supreme Court put another dagger into this form of government by striking down a decades-old cap on the total amount any individual can contribute to federal candidates in a two-year election cycle.
This on the heels of the 2010 Supreme Court decision that stated corporations and unions are people and are free to contribute to political campaigns through “super PACs”. Super PACs cannot work directly with any one particular candidate but can spend their monies, unlimited sums for such things as creating TV or radio ads supporting or excoriating particular candidates.
This changing face of political campaigning and the exponential growth of super PACs have become instrumental in the modern day political process. We saw the impact of a super PAC in the race for mayor with the unions being the dominate force in the David Alvarez campaign. In the last Presidential election super PACs played a key role in Republican politics, but were matched by the grassroots movement of the Obama campaign which saw millions flow into his campaign.
The case of McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, Shaun McCutcheon, an Alabama businessman, gave the maximum allowed to 16 candidates for federal office in the 2012 election cycle. He wanted to give more but was stopped by the limit placed on individuals in a two-year cycle set at $48,000. McCutcheon, who had contributed a total of about $33,000 to 16 candidates for federal office in the 2012 election cycle, said he had wanted to give $1,776 each to 12 more but was stopped by the overall cap for individuals.
Wednesday the conservative majority of the Supreme Court struck down a decades-old cap on the total amount any individual can contribute to federal candidates in a two-year election cycle. This now means that rich individuals, or the 1% of our society, can now give directly to an unlimited number of politicans and PACs. This did not affect the base limits on contributions from individuals to candidates, currently at $2,600 per candidate in primary and general elections. But it said that overall limits of $48,600 by individuals every two years for contributions to all federal candidates violated the First Amendment, as did separate aggregate limits on contributions to political party committees, currently $74,600.
In a minority opinion by Justice Stephen G. Breyer stated that Wed-nesday’s decision would allow “a single individual to contribute millions of dollars to a political party or to a candidate’s campaign.” He was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
The ruling, which goes in effect in a matter of weeks, concerned only contributions from individuals. Federal law continues to ban direct contributions by corporations and unions, though they remain free to spend unlimited sums through “super PACs” and similar vehicles.
This just moves the political process one step further from a democracy of rule by a majority, and gives the wealthy even more power, as if they need any more power, and makes the grassroots roots movement that empowered Obama one step closer to being obsolete.