Two related stories that are kind of flying under the radar right now. First, over at TPM, Zack Roth and Pete Martin explain what’s going on at the Federal Election Commission. Or, rather, what’s not going on. Namely, enforcement of election law. Instead, the Republican faction on the committee, made up entirely of people opposed in principle to the idea of regulating campaign finance, has just decided to paralyze the agency.
Meanwhile, several days ago the Supreme Court gave a strong indication that it intends to overturn the precedent set in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce which, as Ian Millhiser explains, will really gut existing campaign finance law:
Nineteen years ago, in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the Court upheld a ban on independent political expenditures–so-called “soft money” contributions–by corporate donors. As the Court explained in Austin, “the unique state-conferred corporate structure that facilitates the amassing of large treasuries warrants the limit on independent expenditures.” Corporations are designed to amass massive amounts of money, and they can use their enormous wealth to drown out individual voices, all while spending only a fraction of their treasuries.
Should the Court toss out Austin, it could be the end of any meaningful restrictions on campaign finance. In most states, all that is necessary to form a new corporation is to file the right paperwork in the appropriate government office. Moreover, nothing prevents one corporation from owning another corporation. Without Austin, even a cap on overall contributions becomes meaningless, because corporate donors can simply create a series of shell-corporations for the purpose of evading such caps.
These are pretty radical shifts in how our political system operates, and they’re taking place with no public debate or public scrutiny. One seriously doubts that many members of congress would want to stand before the voters and openly make the case that unlimited corporate campaign expenditures will advance the public interest or make the world a better place. Instead, conservative elected officials are managing to undermine the existing legal framework through their appointees while avoiding taking responsibility for what’s happening.