By Amy Goodman with Denis Moynihan


“I never bought a man who wasn’t for sale,” William A. Clark
reportedly said. He was one of Montana’s “Copper Kings,” a man who used
his vast wealth to manipulate the state government and literally buy
votes to make himself a U.S. senator. That was more than 100 years ago,
and the blatant corruption of Clark and the other Copper Kings created a
furor that led to the passage, by citizen initiative, of Montana’s
Corrupt Practices Act in 1912. The century of transparent
campaign-finance restrictions that followed, preventing corporate money
from influencing elections, came to an end this week, as the U.S.
Supreme Court summarily reversed the Montana law. Five justices of the
U.S Supreme Court reiterated: Their controversial Citizens United ruling
remains the law of the land. Clark’s corruption contributed to the
passage of the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Now, close to
100 years later, it may take a popular movement to amend the
Constitution again, this time to overturn Citizens United and confirm,
finally and legally, that corporations are not people.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is the case in which
the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that corporations can contribute unlimited
amounts of funds toward what are deemed “independent expenditures” in
our elections. Thus, corporations, or shadowy “super PACS” that they
choose to fund, can spend as much as they care to on negative campaign
ads, just as long as they don’t coordinate with a candidate’s campaign
committee. That 2010 ruling, approved by a narrow 5-4 majority of the
court, has profoundly altered the electoral landscape—not only for the
presidential election, but also for thousands of races around the
country. According to a summary of the ruling’s impact, prepared by the
National Conference of State Legislatures, “While the ruling does not
directly affect state laws, there are 24 states that currently prohibit
or restrict corporate and/or union spending on candidate elections.”
Montana, with its long history of banning corporate contributions,
was alone among the states to defy those five U.S. Supreme Court
justices. Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia filed a brief
in support of Montana, noting that state elections are different. Their
supporting brief read, “States—particularly resource-rich States with
small populations, like Montana—face the risk that nonresident
corporations with discrete and well-defined interests will dominate
campaign spending in state and local election contests.”

Montana is not known for bipartisanship these days. Democratic Gov.
Brian Schweitzer says his veto pen has run out of ink from the number of
“crazy” Republican bills that he has had to veto since taking office.
Lacking ink, he now takes bills from the Republican-controlled
legislature onto the Capitol steps and emblazons them with a red-hot
branding iron that says “Veto.” So it was significant that, after the
Supreme Court decision this week, Schweitzer and his lieutenant
governor, John Bohlinger, a Republican, stood together before the
Capitol.
Bohlinger said, “Now, Republicans and Democrats don’t always agree on
policy matters, but there’s one thing we do agree on, and that is,
corporate money should not influence the outcome of an election.” To
which Schweitzer added: “Here in Montana, we have a proud, 100-year
history of keeping corporate money out of our elections. Corporations
aren’t people, and they should not control our government. Montana stood
up for democracy, here at home and on behalf of America, by fighting to
keep our ban on corporate campaign spending. The United States Supreme
Court blocked our state law, because they said corporations are people.
I’ll believe that when Texas executes one.”
John Bonifaz is co-founder and director of Free Speech for People,
one of a coalition of groups organizing for a constitutional amendment
that specifies that “People, person, or persons as used in this
Constitution does not include corporations, limited liability companies
or other corporate entities.” He told me: “We’ve seen a growing
mobilization across the country of people calling for an amendment to
reclaim our democracy. Four states are now on record—Hawaii, Rhode
Island, Vermont, New Mexico—calling for an amendment. Other states are
likely to join that fight soon. Montana [has a] statewide ballot in
November for an amendment. Hundreds of municipalities across the country
have called for an amendment. Over a thousand business leaders have
joined that call. And now there are some dozen amendment bills pending
in the United States Congress calling for an amendment, with hearings to
be held before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee this July.”
Perhaps the only silver lining in the Supreme Court’s decision to
send Montana back to the age of the Copper Kings is that a mass movement
is building to assert the rights of people over the power of money in
politics.