Citizens United
has become an all-purpose whipping boy for political outcomes disliked by
liberals. Critics of the Supreme Court’s decision complain that
democracy is undermined when corporations are free to spend huge amounts to
influence leaders and elections,
benefiting the rich at the expense of the 99%.
Even before Tuesday’s recall election in Wisconsin ,
critics were blaming the poll-predicted failure
on “outside” corporate money flooding the state with TV commercials defending Republican
Governor Scott Walker.
The Court’s decision in Citizens
United was not, however, unreasonable. It took literally the First Amendment’s
command that “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press.” It ruled as proposed by the American Civil
Liberties Union, not a hotbed of conservative,
corporate-friendly sentiments. It
frees unions as well as corporations to
spend money on political advocacy. And on
many issues, big corporations can be found on both
sides.
Elections are decided by voters, not by money.
We have never had a president named Rockefeller or Perot. Citizens United does not change the fact
that “the 99%” are potentially 99% of the voters, and that they could vote in
their own interests if they took the time to inform themselves and to think
seriously about candidates and issues.
Critics of Citizens United complain that voters can be manipulated. This is true for some voters some of the
time. But to the extent that voters can be
manipulated, overturning the Supreme
Court’s decision would not improve matters.
It would just disadvantage some fat cats to the benefit of other fat
cats (like the corporate newspaper and
TV chains, which were totally free to propagandize even before Citizens United was decided). If
voters can be manipulated it doesn’t matter much who does the manipulating.
The true remedy to any problems that may have been created
by Citizens United is for Americans to take citizenship
seriously, to actively seek to inform
themselves, and to learn how to think about political candidates and
issues so that they cannot be manipulated by
anybody.
People often assume that our problems are caused by bad
leaders. Our present leaders do and say
many stupid things, but this is not because they are stupid. Too often, it is because if they talked sense
the voters wouldn’t stand for it and would throw them out at the next
election.
If a substantial number of voters would spend an hour a day
boning up on issues and learning how to think productively about politics, this would make it possible for leaders and
potential leaders to talk sense and act wisely more of the time.
There was a famous sign on President Harry Truman’s
desk: “The buck stops here.” This is true for presidential decisions during
emergencies. But for many important decisions, Truman’s sign was misleading. The buck ultimately
stops with our voters, not with our
leaders. Our leaders are smarter than
they currently can afford to act.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are e-mailed to me. I will post excerpts from those I think will most interest readers.