This good in some ways, and bad in others:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court threw out a 63-year-old law designed to restrain the influence of big business and unions on elections Thursday, ruling that corporations may spend as freely as they like to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress. The decision could drastically alter who gives and gets hundreds of millions of dollars in this year’s crucial midterm elections.
By a 5-4 vote, the court overturned two of its own decisions as well as the decades-old law that said companies and labor unions can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to produce and run their own campaign ads. The decision threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.
It leaves in place a prohibition on direct contributions to candidates from corporations and unions.
The good part about this is, is that it frees up private companies to make ads supporting their candidate of their choice. Which does mark a victory for Freedom of Speech. The bad part is, that Unions will now be able to use their own monies to produce smear ads against Republicans. So, it is a double-edged sword. It might be a victory, but at what cost?
Update: Something that I forgot to add, I am still trying to wake up; anyhow, I believe more than anything at all, this new ruling will cause the candidates to have to work harder to get their offices. There will be no more just gliding into the Presidency, like a particular person did in 2008. This means that anyone can produce an ad and run against someone who might have some questionable background, like someone we all know, who won in 2008. Overall, I believe the whole idea, of actually having to work for the office and the leveling of the playing field is a good thing. Because we all saw how Obama basically overran John McCain in this election. The changing of this law will prevent that from every happening again —- and believe me, that is a good thing.
“Unions will now be able to use their own monies to produce smear ads against Republicans.”
The money amassed by unions (representing tens or hundreds of thousands of works) will be dwarfed by the money amassed by entities such as private insurance, tobacco, or oil companies (representing a much smaller number of people with a larger amount of wealth).