Top court: Bring on bucks for elections

WASHINGTON — A bitterly divided Supreme Court vastly increased the power of big business and unions to influence government decisions Thursday by freeing them to spend their millions directly to sway elections for president and Congress.

The ruling reversed a century-long trend to limit the political muscle of corporations, organized labor and their massive war chests. It also recast the political landscape just as crucial midterm election campaigns are getting under way.

Utah politicians said campaigns may become more wild, and maybe more confusing, in the court decision's wake.

"All of a sudden, maybe a candidate can't control his message," said Utah Republican Party Chairman Dave Hansen, who has helped run many state and national campaigns as a consultant. "If a corporation wants to spend enough, that will be the message of the campaign."

He said that depending on how well laws require disclosure about who is paying for ads and how much, candidates may find themselves blamed for what friendly corporations or unions did without consultation (and the Supreme Court allows such "independent expenditure" ads only if corporations and unions do not coordinate with candidates).

"I'm a believer in free speech, but if you get too many voices out there with their own campaign, each with their own individual message, the public may lose track" of who actually said what, and perhaps hold some candidates unfairly accountable for messages spread by others, Hansen said.

But Todd Taylor, executive director of the Democratic Party of Utah, said he doesn't expect too many unions or corporations to jump directly into campaigns for or against candidates. "I don't expect corporations, by and large, to see it in their shareholders' best interests to do that," he said.

Taylor and Hansen do expect corporations and unions to continue to donate directly to state and local candidates' campaigns — which Utah has long allowed, even though the practice was (and still is) banned at the federal level and in 24 states.

A recent spat between EnergySolutions and Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, shows corporations may target some candidates with their own ads. EnergySolutions ran TV ads criticizing a Matheson ad for what it said were half-truths and fear-mongering in a mailer that he sent to voters opposing EnergySolutions' proposals to import foreign low-level radioactive waste.