Shackles taken off corporate

political donations in Ohio

Spending on 'express advocacy' now is
unfettered; direct giving not OK
Thursday, September 16, 2010 02:54 AM
By Darrel Rowland
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has proposed changes to state

election law, but they've been ignored.

Unlimited corporate cash can now flow freely in Ohio political campaigns
because of a federal court agreement yesterday.

"This is a game-changer for Ohio," said Mike Gonidakis, executive director of

the Ohio Right to Life Society, which brought the lawsuit against a state ban
on corporate involvement in the elections process.

"Prior to (yesterday's ruling), we couldn't use the resources we had at our

disposal," he said. "Now, it allows us to hopefully impact the election this
fall."

Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner said "it's turning into the Wild West out
there" because of legislative inaction to regulate corporate cash in politics.

A consent decree signed by U.S. District Judge George C. Smith allows

corporations to engage in "express advocacy" for or against a candidate, as
long as it's independent of the candidate's campaign. Direct contributions to
a candidate or party are still not allowed.

Yesterday's agreement specifically brings Ohio races under the umbrella of

the Citizens United case decided by a 5-4 vote of the U.S. Supreme Court in
January. The high court declared that a federal ban on corporate spending
violated the First Amendment.

The Ohio Elections Commission and secretary of state, who were defendants
in the lawsuit, were part of yesterday's agreement.

Brunner said the state law became unenforceable after the Supreme Court
decision. Shortly after the ruling, she proposed changes to assure
transparency and accountability, but they've been ignored.

Ohio's ban on corporate cash, enacted more than a century ago, was
designed "to prevent the corruption of elections and political parties by
corporations."

The elections commission agreed this month that independent corporate

involvement in partisan politics could no longer be regarded as an elections-
law violation in Ohio. The commission asked that corporations voluntarily
disclose their campaign contributions, but there is no legal requirement.

"Such a filing would manifest the foundation of Ohio's campaign-finance

laws: public disclosure," the commission said.

Philip Richter, executive director of the commission, said he's not sure that
dire predictions of corporate influence on elections will come true.

"I just don't see it being this massive infusion of cash from corporations," he
said.

Ned Foley, former state solicitor and current director of the election law
center at Ohio State University's law school, also was skeptical.

"Whether that is a 'game-changer' depends on whether Citizens United is

itself a 'game-changer,'" he said. "It is certainly possible that it is, at least in
the specific sense that it now permits corporations and labor unions to do
what they couldn't do before. On the other hand, whether as a practical
matter it radically affects the dynamics of the campaign itself, that's more
open to question."

But Gonidakis said there's even more at stake; the Ohio statute contained a
clause that if any of the law was deemed unconstitutional, all of it would be
automatically repealed. That means provisions involving candidate
disclosure and other key issues could now be off the books.

He said the federal court is scheduled to take up that matter in a few days.

While Right to Life has endorsed some Democrats in legislative races, it is

backing a straight Republican ticket in statewide contests.

Dispatch reporter Mark Niquette contributed to this story.

drowland@dispatch.com