<img src=" http://www.joplinglobeonline.com/images/zope/weekend.gif" border=0> Critics raise specter of foreign campaign spending

Discussion

January 30, 2010

Anonymous The Joplin Globe Sat Jan 30, 2010, 08:30 AM CST

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court’s decision on campaign finance has jumbled a seemingly simple rule of American politics — foreigners should play no role in U.S. elections.

President Barack Obama and other critics say the court’s decision to let corporations spend their money to directly influence elections opened the floodgates to foreign involvement. In last week’s address to Congress and the nation, Obama asserted the court had allowed special interests, “including foreign corporations, to spend without limit on our elections.”

That was a step too far. At the moment, foreign corporations may not spend any money in U.S. elections under a provision of federal election law that was untouched by the high court.

The court’s majority opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy specifically left for another day “whether the government has a compelling interest in preventing foreign individuals or associations from influencing our nation’s political process.”

But Justice John Paul Stevens said in his dissenting opinion that the reasoning underlying the ruling “would appear to afford the same protection to multinational corporations controlled by foreigners as to individual Americans.”

The more complicated question is how to treat U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies or American corporations that are controlled by foreign investors.

Before the court ruling, the issue was much more clear. Corporations, including some with foreign ties, could form political action committees (PACs), funded with voluntary and limited contributions from their executives and employees. But they could not spend money from their general treasuries to advocate for or against candidates for federal offices.

For the purposes of determining who could play, U.S. citizens and some legal immigrants could, and everyone else could not.

“The court has suddenly made the prohibition on foreign nationals a much more complicated affair to enforce,” said Tara Malloy, associate legal counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, which wanted the corporate ban upheld. “Now you may have a multinational corporation, and it’s unclear who is funding what, or even what groups in what countries have what interests.”

Floyd Abrams, the First Amendment lawyer who argued the case in favor of striking down the ban on corporate campaign spending, said existing rules that apply to PACs to limit foreign influence could have the same effect on corporate spending generally.

“That said, if it’s an American company, it would presumptively be governed by American law,” Abrams said.

Fred Wertheimer, a longtime advocate of limiting money in politics, said the existing Federal Election Commission rules are inadequate and that the FEC itself is ineffective in enforcing them.

The FEC is reviewing the court ruling and has taken no action so far, a commission spokeswoman said.

But several congressional Democrats are readying legislation that is aimed at blunting the court’s ruling generally and the influence of foreigners specifically.

In crafting their response to the decision, lawmakers have focused on the possibility that investment funds controlled by foreign governments, known as sovereign wealth funds, could end up playing a role in U.S. elections.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said the bill he is drafting with Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., aims to prevent foreign governments from trying to influence elections through investments by their sovereign wealth funds. “That’s the potential,” Van Hollen said. “If that potential is there, we have to do what we can to shut it down.”

But less clear, in a world where states compete for foreign investment and giant U.S. firms are happy to attract international money, is whether election law’s distinction between domestic and foreign corporate money makes sense.

For example, would money tied to Japan’s Toyota Motor Corp., which builds cars and trucks in four states and has parts suppliers in many more, be inherently any worse than contributions from Ford Motor Co., the American car maker that also has operations around the world?

Text Only

National News

Obama budget predicts $1.3T deficit for 2012
The White House on Friday confirmed a report that President Barack Obama’s new budget predicts a $1.3 trillion deficit for the ongoing fiscal year. The deficit would drop to $901 billion next year under the administration’s tax and spending policies.

February 10, 2012 1 Photo
Navy names littoral combat ship after Gabrielle Giffords
Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced Friday that the next Independence variant littoral combat ship will be named after Gabrielle Giffords, the former Arizona congresswoman who survived being shot in the head last January when a gunman opened fire as Giffords met with constituents outside a Tucson grocery store.

February 10, 2012
Under fire, Obama adjusts his birth control policy
Under fierce election-year fire, President Barack Obama on Friday abruptly abandoned his stand that religious organizations must pay for free birth control for workers, scrambling to end a furor raging from the Catholic Church to Congress to his re-election foes

February 10, 2012
They’re back: Social issues overtake US politics
All of a sudden, abortion, contraception and gay marriage are at the center of American political discourse, with the struggling — though improving — economy pushed to the background.

February 10, 2012
Requirements for consumer health insurance summaries unveiled
The Obama administration has unveiled final regulations detailing the new summaries that the 2010 federal health law requires health insurance plans to give to consumers to help them make informed coverage choices.

February 10, 2012
Want an aisle seat? Not for $2,000, Ralph Nader tells American Airlines
As if bankrupt American Airlines didn’t have enough problems, along comes consumer advocate Ralph Nader, who’s really steamed that for a flight Saturday to Dallas/Fort Worth Airport, the only way for a non-frequent flyer to get an aisle seat was to pay a full $2,680 fare instead of the $700 price he’d already paid.

February 9, 2012
Canadian family members rescued from Pacific ocean
Three family members attempting their first voyage across the Pacific in a sailboat were left adrift in rough seas hundreds of miles from land when their mast broke in high winds.

February 9, 2012
House passes ethics bill after deleting one key section
The House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a bill Thursday to curb insider trading by members of Congress and the executive branch, but not without the usual political acrimony that’s become a staple of Capitol Hill.

February 9, 2012
State Department cleared of conflict, not ineptness on Keystone pipeline
An internal audit cleared the State Department of major missteps and conflicts of interest in its environmental review of the Keystone XL pipeline, but faulted the agency for its lack of scientific expertise and for not adequately considering alternate routes.

February 9, 2012
Leaving ’No Child’ law: Obama lets 10 states flee
It could be the beginning of the end for No Child Left Behind.

February 9, 2012 1 Photo
More National News Headlines

Water company cites reconnections

National News

Search Results

Discussion

<img src=" http://www.joplinglobeonline.com/images/zope/weekend.gif" border=0> Critics raise specter of foreign campaign spending

Joplin City Manager Mark Rohr wants the city to distribute weather radios to all Joplin homes that don’t have one. That’s 11,000 radios. Do you think that’s a good use of $300,440?

Joplin City Manager Mark Rohr wants the city to distribute weather radios to all Joplin homes that don’t have one. That’s 11,000 radios. Do you think that’s a good use of $300,440?

Site Map

Contact Us