Push against corporate political speech faces uphill battle in Raleigh

Posted March 4, 2015

— North Carolina would push Congress to help head off the flow of corporate money into the federal, state and local elections under a measure filed by Democrats and favored by Move to Amend, a citizens group calling for a federal constitutional amendment.

"Today, we see elective offices at all levels, including the judiciary, commodities on an open market," said Tom Coulson, a member of Move to Amend who spoke at the legislature Wednesday morning.

House Bill 125 is a resolution that would call on Congress to begin the process of amending the Constitution in a way that would allow the Federal Elections Commission to more tightly regulate campaign finances, particularly money spent directly by corporations and piped by wealthy individuals through nonprofit groups.

North Carolina saw a barrage of so-called "dark money" spending during the 2014 general election, with the U.S. Senate race between Republican victor Thom Tillis and Democratic incumbent Kay Hagan becoming the most expensive in the nation and the most expensive in North Carolina history. Outside money flowed into other contests as well, including a state Supreme Court race and several legislative races.

"Corporations are not people. They shouldn't have the same rights as people," said Rep. Verla Insko, D-Orange, who said that the influence of corporations on elections can be felt in state tax policy and other laws.

Insko pointed to a controversial gas drilling measure that was nearly passed with little notice as an example of corporate spending by energy interests influencing the process.

"It's moving down to the city councils and county commissions," said Rep. Pricey Harrison, D-Guilford, pointing to the efforts of national conservative groups to bring outside money to bear on local races.

Democratic lawmakers and those lobbying for the bill said they had initially been rebuffed by GOP lawmakers who control the General Assembly and were told that their bill represented a partisan strike against Republicans.

"So, they want to take free speech away from citizens," said Sen. Bob Rucho, R-Mecklenburg, who has been deeply involved in a number of elections issues. "They're all for protecting free speech as long as it's their speech."

Asked whether corporations ought not to be able to participate without restrictions in the political process, Rucho asked, "They pay taxes like everybody else, don't they?"

While there is no guarantee a bill will or won't be heard, Republican leaders in the House have assigned House Bill 125 to the Rules Committee, a step often associated with killing a piece of legislation. Uphill battle not withstanding, Insko said she and others backing the bill wanted to make sure the issue was kept alive and that people who want to see election reform had a voice.

"I think it's really important to keep this issue before the people," she said.


Please with your account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • Clovis Sangrail Mar 4, 2015
    user avatar

    Since this is protected speech under Federal First Amendment, the fact that State legislators are filing bills is a complete waste of time.

  • Christopher Rose Mar 4, 2015
    user avatar

    Especially since ALEC bought this legislature and holds the title and keys.

  • Robert Richardson Mar 4, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread

    Thank you!

  • Matt Wood Mar 4, 2015
    user avatar

    "Asked whether corporations ought not to be able to participate without restrictions in the political process, Rucho asked, 'They pay taxes like everybody else, don't they?'"

    Felons pay taxes, too, and still don't get to participate in the electoral process. Corporations may pay taxes, but they are most certainly NOT people, they are GROUPS of people. People who already have their own free speech rights and spending ability outside of the corporation. Just because someone owns or is part of a corporation, that should not grant them special rights when it comes to influencing elections. Period.