Indirect Corruption is Not Enough for Republican National Committee
Group challenges constitutionality of ban on direct investment in candidates and office-holders
By Josh Gerstein
First Published by Politico, January 10, 2012
The century-old ban on corporate donations to federal political campaigns should be junked as unconstitutional, the Republican National Committee argued in a legal brief filed Tuesday that could lead to new attacks on the GOP as beholden to corporate money.
The GOP brief filed with a federal appeals court contends that the ban which became law back in 1908 violates the First Amendment in light of recent Supreme Court rulings, including the 2010 Citizens United decision which allowed unlimited donations to independent-expenditure groups.
Republican National Committee Chief Counsel John R. Phillippe, Jr. and RNC lawyer Gary Lawkowski contend that the only legitimate rationale for the corporate donation ban now is to prevent an end-run around individual donation limits and that's not an adequate basis to uphold the ban.
"The complete ban both is over-inclusive to this aim and artificially disadvantages political party and candidate committees. It is over-inclusive because it bans all corporate donations without regard to the ability of corporate donors to attribute their donations to individuals. It artificially disadvantages political party and candidate committees by forcing them to rely on aggregating small-dollar donations from individuals while allowing other political actors, such as independent-expenditure-only political action committees, to receive unlimited corporate donations," the GOP lawyers wrote.
The brief does not argue against all donation limits for corporations, but as a practical matter a ruling against the current ban would likely lead to such a result.
Whatever its constitutional merits, the Republican argument could be a political liability for the party as Democrats are likely to portray it as further evidence that the GOP is beholden to corporate America. On the other hand, the near-complete breakdown of campaign finance limits during the current presidential race gives something of a boost to those contending that the few remaining restraints are pointless.
Oddly enough, the RNC is coming to the defense of a pair of Virginia businessmen accused of making illegal corporate contributions to Hillary Clinton's Senate and presidential campaigns, William Danielczyk and Eugene Biagi. The pair are accused of using corporate funds to reimburse about $186,000 in donations made by various individuals. The Republican Party arguments were submitted as an amicus brief supporting the accused businessmen.
U.S. District Judge James Cacheris ruled last May that the corporate donation ban is unconstitutional. However, his initial opinion failed to take account of a 2003 Supreme Court ruling upholding the ban on donations by most non-profit corporations. Cacheris later issued another opinion reaching the same result, namely that the ban is unconstitutional.
The Justice Department is appealing Cacheris's decision, which undercut the prosecution of Danielczyk and Biagi. The case could become a vehicle for the Supreme Court could to overturn the corporate donation ban.
© 2011 Politico
Go to Home Page
Each week we review dozens of articles and essays from both corporate and independent media sources and choose one that we believe brings you unique or important information or perspectives on issues of democracy and corporate power. Opinions presented do not necessarily reflect those of ReclaimDemocracy.org.Index of past features
Fair Use Notice
This site occasionally reprints copyrighted material, the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
We make such material available in our efforts to advance understanding
of issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this
site is available without profit. For more information go to
: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes
of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
