Nexus: Chapman's Journal of Law and Public Policy

In early 2010, the Citizens United case decided that corporations were allowed to exercise their First Amendment right to use their funds to broadcast “electioneering communications” naming federal candidates within thirty days of a primary election and sixty days of a general election. While doing background research on the topic, I became interested in what other people’s viewpoints were on the issue and I came to find that everyone who is anyone has had something to say on the topic. I was unaware how strongly people felt on the matter and how definitive their stances were. The more I read about the concerns of each side, the more I found myself not being able to agree completely with either opinion or take a strong stand on the matter. Both sides make good points and have strong arguments to plead their case, however, in the end, I came away from all the research questioning how important the decision actually was. I kept finding myself asking, “How much of an impact does corporate campaign spending actually have on the outcome of elections?”

To say that politics is not fueled by money would be a complete and utter lie. Corporate money will always find its way into the political realm. In America, money is power. Therefore, no matter if corporate campaign spending is allowed or not is beside the point. Corporate money will always influence politics, and I do not see any sign of that ever changing. I feel it would almost be better to be open and honest about corporate campaign spending then to attempt to keep it behind closed doors. As Americans, I feel we sometimes follow the mantra of what we don’t see, won’t hurt us. I disagree with that motto. I feel it’s much better for the government to be up front about the issue. Since corporate spending is such a common occurrence and does in fact play an impact in politics, then why not just allow it, and be open about it how often it occurs. At least it might make people more aware of who is backing certain political viewpoints, which in turn make them more conscious of corporate agenda’s that are placed behind the message. Therefore, in my opinion, corporate funding will be there no matter what the decision in Citizens United came out to be.

I do see the other side of things and understand peoples concern that by allowing corporate campaign spending it will have too large an impact on people’s viewpoints and it will drown out the voice of the average American. In today’s society, I feel most people are not educated on the issues that the politicians they support take and where those politicians actually stand on important matters. Therefore, some people’s opinions are based on what they see and hear around them. If corporate funded political ads are constantly being run, it is what those people will be exposed to most, and it may play a role in how they feel about a particular candidate or an issue.

However, I do not believe that is as a big of a problem as it is made out to be. The media is constantly bombarded with smear campaigns and falsities about political candidates. So much so that I feel Americans are at the point of ignoring political advertisements. Most Americans today are pessimistic about the political process because it has turned into a blood bath between politicians and has evolved into a game of who can hurt each other’s reputation more. The important political issues have taken a back burner to all the accusations and rumors spread between political candidates. It’s extremely difficult, if not impossible, to tell which advertisements are truthful and which are not. There are so many conflicting ads about politicians and their stance on matters that most people hardly believe a word any of them say anymore. Adding more corporate funded political advertisements to the already over crowded media stream will not make that much of a difference on what people already think. Even though the concern is still there, I believe if you look at the big picture, it really will not have that large of an impact.

Overall, I believe that whether or not corporate funding can be used for political broadcasts will not have that much of an impact on people’s viewpoints. For myself, political advertisements have never played a large role in how I felt about a candidate or an issue, and I believe most people in our country feel the same way. I also strongly believe that corporate funding will be there no matter what decision is made on the matter. Our country has and always will be driven by money. Corporations’ opinions will get heard and their funds will be spent no matter what the outcome may have been. Therefore, I do not believe the decision made in Citizens United is going to have that significant of an impact on the political atmosphere of our country.