This blog is a Kitsap Sun reader blog. The Kitsap Sun neither edits nor previews reader blog posts. Their content is the sole creation and responsibility of the readers who produce them. Reader bloggers are asked to adhere to our reader blog agreement. If you have a concern or would like to start a reader blog of your own, please contact

More Reaction to Supreme Court Decision

You may have noticed President Obama’s critique of the recent Supreme Court decision on corporate spending on campaigns during his State of the Union speech.
The League shares Obama’s concerns.
Longtime League member Pam Hamon recently wrote the following letter to the editor on the recent Supreme Court decision on corporate campaign spending:

To the Editor:
It’s a sad day for democracy and the individual voter. The Supreme Court’s 5 to 4 decision now allows large corporations, banks, financial institutions and unions the ability to spend, without limits, funds from their treasuries for candidate and issue campaigns. This goes against 30 years of precedence and a century of practice. Voters will need to do more homework to be sure they fully understand the issues before casting their votes because we all know money counts and manipulates.
Pam Hamon

Here is the national League position on the Supreme Court decision:

Washington, DC –The following is a statement by Mary G. Wilson, national president of the League of Women Voters on the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC. The League filed an amicus brief in this case:
“The Supreme Court has made a tragic mistake. Their decision announced today in Citizens United v. FEC is constitutionally irresponsible and will surely bring about an anti-democratic revolution in how we finance elections in this country. Today, basic pillars of American democracy have been undermined – that elections should not be corrupted by vast corporate wealth and that the voters should be at the center of our democratic system.
“Justice Stevens had it right when he said, in his dissent, ‘The Court’s ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation. The path it has taken to reach its outcome will, I fear, do damage to this institution.’
“In creating a new constitutional right for corporations to spend unlimited amounts of their shareholder’s money to determine the outcome in candidate elections, the Court has unleashed into our elections tremendous sums of money from for-profit corporations that cannot possibly be matched in quantity by contributions from ordinary citizens. The only possible outcome of this is that big money and special interests will have an even tighter grip on our democracy.
“Congress and the President enacted campaign finance laws over a series of decades for a reason – to protect our democracy from the perverse influence of big money in our elections. In making this decision, the Court has ignored the best interests of the American public and our representative form of government.”