The unlimited funding of Super PACs and 501(c)4 organizations by corporations, unions, and anonymous affluent individuals aiming to sway America’s elections at all levels was a direct effect of the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court. The Court equated spending money on elections with free speech, providing a major advantage to the Republican Party in this election cycle.
The repeated attack ads by conservative groups attempting to influence voters to cast their ballots for right-wing candidates, with liberal groups also trying but lagging behind, were bad enough, generating the most expensive election in American history. But now we find that there is additional fallout from Citizens United that tarnishes the concept of democracy through free elections.
A recent article in the New York Times (http://goo.gl/ZHNEB) highlighted the way the Citizens United ruling allows corporate executives to “recommend” to their employees whom to vote for. The suggestions are sometimes worded quite strongly, in letters or information packets, saying that their company’s future and people’s jobs will be in danger if President Obama is re-elected. The CEOs warn that higher taxes, health care costs, and increased regulations under Obama will further damage the economy, forcing the company to downsize and lay off employees.
One CEO said he was not ordering his employees to vote for a particular candidate or party, but wanted them to know what he believed. He said it was no different than directing his children to do what was good for them; like having them eat their spinach. (It is interesting that some corporate executives consider their employees on the same level as children, and that as their surrogate parents, they are better able to make the correct political decisions for them.)
A number of major companies have followed this tack, including Georgia-Pacific, Cintas, and Westgate Resorts. Georgia-Pacific is a subsidiary of Koch Industries and the president of the company delivered an information packet and letter expressing his views to over 30,000 employees last month. It warned of “higher gasoline prices, runaway inflation and other ills” if Obama was reelected, along with “unprecedented regulatory burdens on businesses.” The packet listed candidates supported by the Koch brothers, topped by Romney, with related opinion articles reinforcing their views.
This type of arm-twisting by CEOs and owners of companies instills fear in their employees and discourages political discussion in the workplace, in private life, or amongst friends. It makes employees reluctant to actively work or show support for Obama or Democratic candidates by wearing buttons, having bumper stickers, or putting up yard signs, as well as being disinclined to speak out for their own choices. In this way, in addition to the Super PACs funded by the wealthy, the Citizens United ruling has actually suppressed free speech rather than fostering it.
Corporate executives declare that their political activities that target their workers are meant to nullify the operations of organized labor in support of Obama and other Democratic candidates. Romney himself in a co9nference call in June appealed to business owners to make clear to their employees which candidates will better assure their job security and futures in the upcoming election.
The question raised is whether any of these “recommendations” by bosses have crossed the line into coercion or intimidation by raising the possibility of job losses. Analysts of Citizens United say the law allows companies to make recommendations on candidates to their employees and that the communications do not include any direct threats of firing and so are legal. However, there is an asymmetry of power between employer and employee that would certainly tend to repress free speech by the latter in support of Democratic candidates, particularly in a time when unemployment is high and jobs are hard to find.
This is another way that the Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court in 2010 has worked against the free and open Democratic process and further tipped the balance in favor of owners, executives, and the affluent members of American society.
Resurrecting Democracy
A VietNam vet and a Columbia history major who became a medical doctor, Bob Levine has watched the evolution of American politics over the past 40 years with increasing alarm. He knows he’s not alone. Partisan grid-lock, massive cash contributions and even more massive expenditures on lobbyists have undermined real democracy, and there is more than just a whiff of corruption emanating from Washington. If the nation is to overcome lockstep partisanship, restore growth to the economy and bring its debt under control, Levine argues that it will require a strong centrist third party to bring about the necessary reforms. Levine’s previous book, Shock Therapy For the American Health Care System took a realist approach to health care from a physician’s informed point of view; Resurrecting Democracy takes a similar pragmatic approach, putting aside ideology and taking a hard look at facts on the ground. In his latest book, Levine shines a light that cuts through the miasma of party propaganda and reactionary thinking, and reveals a new path for American politics. This post is cross posted from his blog.
Image from Shutterstock.com
Political junkie, Vietnam vet, neurologist- three books on aging and dementia. Book on health care reform in 2009- Shock Therapy for the American Health Care System. Book on the need for a centrist third party- Resurrecting Democracy- A Citizen’s Call for a Centrist Third Party published in 2011. Aging Wisely, published in August 2014 by Rowman and Littlefield. Latest book- The Uninformed Voter published May 2020